Search results
Get a hint. Escobedo v. Illinois. June 22, 1964. After being arrested and taken into police custody as a suspect in the murder of his brother-in-law, the petitioner asked to speak to his attorney.
Escobedo v. Illinois. This case established the absolute right to remain silent. This came to be as Escobedo was refused consultation with his lawyer and was eventually made to confess to murder. Basically he was forced to incriminate himself and as a result had his rights violated.
Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like Which Constitutional amendment guarantees the right to counsel for an accused defendant?, What was the net effect of Scott v. Illinois (1979) in terms of the right to counsel?, According to the Supreme Court's critical-stages test, a defendant must be allowed to have a lawyer ...
Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 (1964), is a United States Supreme Court case holding that criminal suspects have a right to counsel during police interrogations under the Sixth Amendment. [1] The case was decided a year after the court had held in Gideon v. Wainwright that indigent criminal defendants have a right to be provided counsel at ...
Decided June 22, 1964. 378 U.S. 478. Syllabus. Petitioner, a 22-year-old of Mexican extraction, was arrested with his sister and taken to police headquarters for interrogation in connection with the fatal shooting, about 11 days before, of his brother-in-law.
Justice Harlan dissented, opining that the judgment of the Supreme Court of Illinois should be affirmed because the majority's conclusion would unjustifiably fetter legitimate methods of criminal law enforcement.
The Court held that the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights had been violated because the police had used the accomplice to elicit incriminatory statements after the right to counsel had attached. The Supreme Court in Escobedo reached a similar result in a 5 to 4 decision.
