To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




Illinois v. Perkins

Law Dictionary

Law Dictionary

Featuring Black's Law Dictionary 2nd Ed.
Font size

Criminal Procedure keyed to Israel

Citation. Illinois v. 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.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. Miranda warnings are not required when an undercover agent asks questions that could result in incriminating statements.

Facts. After obtaining information that a murder suspect was being held in jail on an unrelated charge, police placed an undercover agent in jail with the suspect. The agent engaged the suspect in conversations, and the suspect then made incriminating statements about the murder. The trial court granted the respondent Lloyd Perkins’s motion to suppress the statements made at the jail at his murder trial, and the appellate court affirmed. The state of Illinois was granted certiorari.

Issue. Are Miranda warnings required when an undercover agent is asking questions that could elicit an incriminating result?
See More Course Videos

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following