Illinois v. Perkins

Justice Brennan wrote a concurring opinion. He agreed that when a suspect does not know that his questioner is a police agent, the questioning does not amount to "interrogation" in an "inherently coercive" environment and thus does not require the Miranda warnings. However, Brennan felt that the deception and manipulation practiced on Perkins raised a substantial claim that the confession violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. In his opinion, the state was in a unique position to exploit a suspect's vulnerability because it had complete control over the suspect's environment. An undercover agent could barrage a suspect with questions until he confessed, as in Perkins's case. The deliberate use of deception and manipulation by the police was incompatible with a system that presumes innocence and assures that inquisitorial means will not be used to get a conviction.