Search results
Perkins, 1989 U.S. LEXIS 3741, 493 U.S. 808, 110 S. Ct. 49, 107 L. Ed. 2d 18, 58 U.S.L.W. 3213 (U.S. Oct. 2, 1989) Brief Fact Summary. An undercover police agent was placed in jail with the suspect and got them to elicit incriminating statements.
In this case, the police deceptively took advantage of Perkins' psychological vulnerability by including him in a sham escape plot, a situation in which he would feel compelled to demonstrate his willingness to shoot a prison guard by revealing his past involvement in a murder.
ILLINOIS v. PERKINS. CERTIORARI TO THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, JUDICIAL DISTRICT. FIFTH. No. 88-1972. Argued February 20, 1990-Decided June 4, 1990. Police placed undercover agent Parisi in a jail cellblock with respondent Perkins, who was incarcerated on charges unrelated to the murder that Parisi was investigating.
In Illinois v. Perkins, I an undercover law enforcement officer posed as an inmate in order to elicit incriminating statements from a murder suspect being held on unrelated charges. The trial court granted a mo-tion to suppress the statements because the undercover officer had not given Miranda warnings to the suspect prior to the questioning. On
20 lut 1990 · establish that Defendant Perkins in this case perceived no pressures whatsoever to speak when making his incriminating statements, but, rather, he was simply killing time with boastful admissions to those whom he believed to be co-conspirators in a jail break. After detailing how the privilege against self
Illinois v. Perkins 496 U.S. 292, 110 S. Ct. 2394, 110 L. Ed.2d 243 (1990) Perkins was in jail on suspicion for murder. His cellmate (and prison snitch), Charlton, told police that Perkins had confessed to him. The police put an undercover officer, Parisi, in the jail cell, under the guise of being another prisoner.
Illinois v. Perkins Case Brief Summary: A prisoner in jail admitted to a murder to another inmate, who was actually an undercover government agent.
