Colorado v. Connelly

Petitioner

State of Colorado

Respondent

Francis Barry Connelly

Petitioner's Claim

The state of Colorado maintained that the statements given by a defendant and admitted during trial were not in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, although the defendant was mentally ill at the time of his confession.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

Nathan B. Coats

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

Thomas M. Van Cleave

Justices for the Court

Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, Byron R. White

Justices Dissenting

Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, John Paul Stevens

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

10 December 1986

Decision

The Court ruled that statements by a mentally ill defendant that were given as evidence did not represent police coercion nor violate the Due Process Clause. Neither were such statements in violation of Miranda rights because the defendant was not coerced or misled into surrendering rights guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment.

Related Cases

• Blackburn v. Alabama, 361 U.S. 199 (1960).
• Culombe v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 (1961).
• Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293 (1963).
• Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
• Harris v. New York, 401 U.S. 222 (1971).
• Lego v. Twomey, 404 U.S. 477 (1972).

Sources

West's Encyclopedia of American Law, Vol. 7, p. 233. Minneapolis, MN: West Publishing, 1998.