Escobedo v. Illinois
Significance, The Supreme Court Confirms A Criminal Suspect's Right To Have An Attorney, The Right To Counsel
Petitioner
Danny Escobedo
Respondent
State of Illinois
Petitioner's Claim
That once a person detained by police for questioning about a crime becomes a suspect, his Sixth Amendment right to counsel becomes effective.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Barry L. Kroll
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
James R. Thompson
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black, William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Arthur Goldberg (writing for the Court), Earl Warren
Justices Dissenting
Tom C. Clark, John Marshall Harlan II, Potter Stewart, Byron R. White
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
22 June 1964
Decision
By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court ruled that because Escobedo's request to consult with his attorney had been denied and because he had not been warned of his constitutional right to remain silent, his confession was inadmissible and his conviction was reversed.
Related Cases
- Crooker v. California, 357 U.S. 433 (1958).
- Cicenia v. Lagay, 357 U.S. 504 (1958).
- Gideon v Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963).
- Massiah v. United States, 377 U.S. 201 (1964).
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
Sources
West's Encyclopedia of American Law, Vol. 3. Minneapolis, MN: West Publishing, 1998.
Additional topics
- Evans v. Newton - Significance, A Bequest To The Public, A Public Or A Private Facility?, Impact, De Facto Segregation
- Ernesto Miranda Trials: 1963 1967 - Tainted Evidence, Conviction Overturned
- Escobedo v. Illinois - Significance
- Escobedo v. Illinois - Further Readings
- Escobedo v. Illinois - The Supreme Court Confirms A Criminal Suspect's Right To Have An Attorney
- Escobedo v. Illinois - The Right To Counsel
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1963 to 1972