Document: 496 U.S. 292 110 S.Ct. 2394 L.Ed.2d 243 ILLINOIS, Petitionerv.Lloyd PERKINS. No. 88-1972. Argued Feb. 20, 1990. Decided June 4, Syllabus Police placed undercover agent Parisi in a jail cellblock with respondent Perkins, who was incarcerated on charges unrelated to the murder that investigating. When asked him if he had ever killed anybody, Perkins made statements implicating himself murder. He then charged The trial court granted respondent's motion suppress his ground not given warnings required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 436, 86 1602, 16 694, before their conversations. Appellate Court of Illinois affirmed, holding prohibits all contacts suspects are reasonably likely elicit an incriminating response. Held: An law enforcement officer posing as fellow inmate need give suspect asking questions may doctrine must be enforced strictly, but only situations where concerns underlying decision present. Those implicated here, since essential ingredients "police-dominated atmosphere" and compulsion lacking. It is Miranda's premise danger coercion results from interaction custody official interrogation, whereby feel compelled speak fear reprisal for remaining silent or hope more lenient treatment should confess. That coercive atmosphere present when person speaks freely someone whom believes assumes having power over him. In such circumstances, does forbid mere strategic deception taking advantage suspect's misplaced trust. difference between this case Hoffa United States, 385 293, 87 408, 17 374—which upheld placing near order gather information—is incarcerated. Detention, however, whether crime question, warrant presumption use renders involuntary resulting confession. Mathis 391 1, 88 1503, 20 381—which held inmate's known were inadmissible because no given—is distinguishable. Where know speaking government agent, there reason assume possibility coercion. Massiah 377 201, 84 1199, 12 246, similar cases which circumvent Sixth Amendment right counsel once has been charged—are inapplicable, since, filed at time interrogation. Also unavailing Perkins' argument bright-line rule application desirable, officers will have little difficulty applying case. Pp. 296-300. 176 Ill.App.3d 443, 126 Ill.Dec. 8, 531 N.E.2d 141 (1988), reversed remanded. KENNEDY, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, BLACKMUN, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, JJ., joined. BRENNAN, concurring judgment, post, p. 300. MARSHALL, dissenting opinion, 303. Marcia L. Friedl, Chicago, Ill., petitioner. Paul J. Larkin, Jr., Washington, D.C., amicus curiae, support petitioner, special leave Court. Dan W. Evers, Mount Vernon, respondent. Justice KENNEDY 1 cell subject agent's investigation. Respondent sought solve. claims agent. We hold admissible. unaware gives voluntary statement. 2 * November 1984, Richard Stephenson murdered suburb East St. Louis, Illinois. remained unsolved until March 1986, one Donald Charlton told police learned about homicide Graham Correctional Facility, serving sentence burglary. Lloyd here. that, while Graham, befriended respondent, detail committed Louis. On hearing Charlton's account, recognized details well known, so they treated story credible one. 3 By heard released traced Montgomery County, Illinois, being pending charge aggravated battery, wanted investigate further connection murder, feared eavesdropping device would prove impracticable unsafe. They decided instead place Charlton. plan andun dercover John pose escapees work release program arrested course instructed engage casual conversation report anything said 4 Parisi, using alias "Vito Bianco," Charlton, both clothed garb, County jail. consisted separate cells opened onto common room. greeted who, after brief introduced alias. "wasn't going do any time" suggested three them escape. replied "rinky-dink" could "break out." trio met later evening, other inmates asleep, refine plan. girlfriend smuggle pistol. said: "Hey, I'm murderer, burglar. That's your guys' profession." After telling responsible occurred, "done" anybody. proceeded describe length events engaged some went sleep. did 5 Before trial, moved suppress, State appealed. 694 (1966), 6 certiorari, 493 808, 49, 107 18 (1989), decide now reverse. II 7 supra, Fifth privilege against self-incrimination admitting during "custodial interrogation" without prior warning. Custodial interrogation means "questioning initiated taken into custody. . ." Id. U.S., 444, S.Ct., 1612. warning mandated meant preserve "incommunicado individuals police-dominated atmosphere." Id., 445, generate "inherently compelling pressures undermine individual's resist compel otherwise freely." 467, 1624. "Fidelity announced requires it those types powered implicated." Berkemer McCarty, 468 420, 437, 104 3138, 3148, 82 317 (1984). 8 Conversations agents implicate Miranda. inmate. Coercion determined perspective suspect. Rhode Island Innis, 446 291, 301, 100 1682, 1689, 64 297 (1980); 442, 3151. considers company cellmates officers, Miranda, 449, 1614 ("[T]he 'principal psychological factor contributing successful privacy—being alone under interrogation' "); id., There empirical basis assumption 9 reject whenever technical sense converses happens Questioning captors, appear control fate, create mutually reinforcing assumed weaken will, conversing these exist. state here mistakenly custody, questioning take place. think listeners him, words motivated reaction expects listeners. "[W]hen carries neither badge nor gun wears 'police blue,' same prison gray" suspect, "interplay custody." Kamisar, Brewer Williams, Miranda: What "Interrogation"? Does Matter?, 67 Geo.L.J. 67, 63 (1978). 10 forbids coercion, trust supposes prisoner. As we "[C]onfessions remain proper element enforcement. Any statement voluntarily influences is, course, admissible evidence." 478, 1629. Ploys mislead lull false security rise level within 's concerns. Cf. Oregon Mathiason, 429 492, 495-496, 97 711, 714, 50 714 (1977) (per curiam); Moran Burbine, 475 412, 106 1135, 89 410 (1986) (where fail inform attorney's efforts reach suppression prearraignment confession waiver). 11 protect boasting criminal activities front persons believe cellmates. This illustrative. legal authority force answer affect future treatment. viewed cellmate-agent equal showed hint intimidated recounting solely desire impress inmates. spoke own peril. tactic employed violate Self-Incrimination Clause. 374 information permissible Amendment. Hoffa, petitioner often Partin, unbeknownst cooperating officials. Partin reported officials divulged attempts bribe jury members. approved Hoffa's subsequent tampering, rationale "no claim ha[d] [have been] [Hoffa's] product sort factual." 304, 414. addition, found fact fooled thinking sympathetic colleague voluntariness statements. Ibid. (officer's falsely fingerprints scene render interview "custodial" ); Frazier Cupp, 394 731, 739, 1420, 1424, 22 684 (1969); Procunier Atchley, 400 446, 453-454, 91 485, 489, 27 524 (1971). incarcerated, detention, makes thus obtained involuntary. 13 Our 381 (1968), Mathis, interviewed Internal Revenue Service possible tax violations. No questioning. fraud charges. aware Government official, investigating noncompliance laws. us different. might coerced. (The bare every instance require even occasion explore issue here.) 14 Court's decisions 246 (1964), States Henry, 447 264, 2183, 65 115 (1980), Maine Moulton, 474 159, 477, 481 (1985), also avail crime. filed, prevents interfering accused's counsel. 176, 487. instant our precedents applicable. 15 can seek help desirable. Law putting practice suspects. technique, context detect violence correctional inmates, purposes served interests protected cases, safeguard constitutional rights make agents. voluntary, federal obstacle admissibility trial. reverse remand proceedings inconsistent opinion. ordered. judgment. 19 holds Although I subscribe majority's characterization its entirety, agree questioner amount "interrogation" coercive" environment Since raised stage litigation applicability Miranda,* concur judgment say Constitution condones method extracted To contrary, manipulation practiced raise substantial violation Due Process recently stated Miller Fenton, 104, 109-110, 448-449, 405 (1985): 21 "This long certain techniques, either isolation applied unique characteristics particular offensive civilized system justice condemned Clause Fourteenth framed inquiry variety different ways, usually through 'convenient shorthand' 'involuntary,' Blackburn Alabama, 361 199, 207 [80 274, 280, 242] (1960), analysis consistently animated view 'ours accusatorial inquisitorial system,' Rogers Richmond, 365 534, 541 [81 735, 760] (1961), accordingly, tactics eliciting inculpatory fall broad boundaries imposed Amendment's guarantee fundamental fairness." derived "is significant reflects turns much techniques extracting statements, compatible presumes innocence assures conviction secured defendant's overborne." 116, 452. See Spano New York, 360 315, 320-321, 79 1202, 1205-1206, 1265 (1959) ("The abhorrence society confessions turn inherent untrustworthiness. deep-rooted feeling obey enforcing law; end life liberty endangered illegal methods used convict thought criminals actual themselves"); see Degraffenreid McKellar, 494 107, 1072-1074, 1794, ----, 108 794 (1990) (MARSHALL, joined denial certiorari). deserves close scrutiny. devised ruse lure charge. A proposing sham escape plot, tricked confessing way proving willing again arise testimony informant reveal deliberate manner two elicited App. 43-53 66-73. "the imposes accused; confinement bring play subtle particularly susceptible ploys agents." 2188, (1980). MARSHALL points out, confide others "jailhouse bravado." 307-308. position exploit vulnerability virtually complete environment. Thus, ensure barraged confesses. Mincey 437 385, 399, 98 2408, 2417, 57 290 (1978); Ashcraft Tennessee, 322 143, 153-155, 921, 925-927, L.Ed. 1192 (1944). suggests just that. 23 appears incompatible "with means," Miller, 452, raises serious overborne. open lower determine whether, totality violated physical torture, Brown Mississippi, 278, 56 461, 80 682 (1936) overt pressure, Payne Arkansas, 356 560, 566, 78 844, 849, 975 (1958), inquiry. "[A]s become responsible, extract sophisticated, [a court's] duty enforce protections cease. becomes difficult delicate judgments made." Spano, 321, 1206. 24 dissenting. 25 clearly simply (1966): "[T]he prosecution exculpatory inculpatory, stemming custodial defendant unless demonstrates procedural safeguards effective secure self-incrimination." conditions apprise conducted police—were Because received subjected 26 reaches contrary conclusion fashioning exception applies "an ask[s] response" Ante, supporting allows intentionally rights. therefore dissent. dispute county here; term defined 1612; 4-5, 1504-1505, (1968) (holding questioned Miranda). argues purpose familiar result days previously spending prison. Brief Amicus Curiae 11. familiarity confinement, transform incarceration noncustodial arrangement. Orozco Texas, 324, 1095, 311 (1969) home bedroom notwithstanding surroundings). 28 While confined, officer, informant, interrogated, downplays nature 35-minute disingenuously referring "conversatio[n]." 295, 296. officer's narration "conversation" reveals 29 "[Agent:] You anyone? 30 "[Perkins:] Yeah, rich white neighborhood. 31 "Informant: didn't neighborhoods 32 "Perkins: wasn't race track Fairview Heights. 33 "[Agent]: guy Heights? 34 Yeah section most houses look same. 35 "[Informant]: If same, how you house? 36 Me guys cased house week. knew exactly house, second left corner. 37 How ago happen? 38 Approximately years ago. got paid $5,000 job. 39 go down? 40 walked up [to] guy['s] sawed-off my trench coat. 41 type gun[?] 42 .12 gauge Remmington [sic] Automatic Model 1100 sawed-off." 49-50. 43 continued inquiry, series designed specific victim, scene, weapon, motive, actions shooting. 50-52. "conversation"; participants free-ranging discussion, each man offering views topics. Rather, interrogation: express evoke 300-301, 1689-1690, 44 interrogated rejecting conclusion, finds "conversations" devoid station interrogations openly represent State. not, concerned dealt operate full awareness supra 468, 1624 (referring "inherent atmosphere"); Estelle Smith, 451 454, 101 1866, 1875, 68 359 (1981) [the Miranda] admonitions combat what saw 'inherently pressures' provide consequences forgoing it") (quoting 1624). structures feels information, opportunity talk. 45 proscribed includes police. 453, 1616 (indicting "to induce out trickery," fictitious witnesses accusations); 433, 3146, (1984) prescribed coerce trick captive confessing") (emphasis deleted added). 421, 1140, relinquishment [protected warnings] free choice rather than intimidation, deception") find trickery itself sufficient constitute acknowledged context: 206, 1203, (1964) (holding, Amendment, "more seriously upon agent") (citation internal quotation marks omitted). 46 Custody works State's obtaining information. increase anxiety, making relief talking others. Dix, Undercover Investigations Rulemaking, 53 Texas L.Rev. 203, 230 (1975). Gibbs, First Cut Deepest: Psychological Breakdown Survival Detention Setting, Pains Imprisonment 97, (R. Johnson & H. Toch eds. 1982); Hagel-Seymour, Environmental Sanctuaries Susceptible Prisoners, Imprisonment, 267, 279; Chicago Tribune, Apr. 15, 1990, D3 (prosecutors prisoners talk inmates). Similarly, constant threat peculiar demonstrate toughness inventing past violent acts. "Because ability select people completely control, vulnerability. short, insure lead anyone, agent." (Footnote omitted.) White, Trickery Inducing Confessions, 127 U.Pa.L.Rev. 581, 605 (1979). case, deceptively took including situation willingness shoot guard revealing involvement 49 (agent stressed killing necessary someone). 47 allow deceptive eliminated ignorance interrogator's true identity. inquire facts required. 48 adoption principle, simple clear. See, e.g., 441-442, 1610-1611 (noting certiorari concrete guidelines agencies courts follow"); 430, 3145 principal advantages [Miranda] clarity rule"); Arizona Roberson, 486 675, 680, 2093, 2097, 704 (1988) (same). York Quarles, 467 649, 657-658, 2626, 2632-2633, 81 550 (recognizing finding narrow "public safety" significantly lessen easy apply). explained benefits Fare Michael C., 442 707, 99 2560, 61 197 (1979): "Miranda's virtue informing prosecutors specificity conducting circumstances admissible." 718, 2568. today complicates clear straightforward doctrine. opines "[l]aw suspects." 299-300. Perhaps prediction respect patterns identical today. But outer created Would violated, instance, beat another prisoner purposes? Even interpreted permit obviously confessions, ramifications today's still disturbing. carved proliferation departmental policies encourage conduct confined agents, thereby circumventing administer warnings. Indeed, confess," ante, 296-297, presumably member clergy defense attorney. abhorrent tricks trusted adviser, cause "think him," 297. "undercover agent" necessarily loophole jurisprudence protecting suspects' 51 comes us, involves question Nothing invoked silence, right, focus subsequently waived right. Edwards 1880, 378 (1981); Michigan Mosley, 423 96, 96 326, 313 (1986), waiver "must [be] [must be] deception." (Emphasis added.) questioned, able challenge admission (1988); 326. formally counsel, Jackson, 625, 629-636, 1404, 1407-1411, 631 (1986). 683-685, 2099-2100.

Category: 0