Smith v. Illinois (469 U.S. 91)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided December 10, 1984 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 469 U.S. 91 · 105 S. Ct. 490
- Decided
- December 10, 1984
- Term
- October Term 1984
- Vote
- 6–3
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Per Curiam. The petitioner Steven Smith was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to a 9-year prison term. He contends that the police improperly elicited a confession from him after he clearly had requested the assistance of counsel, and that the trial court’s refusal to suppress the confession therefore violated Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (1966), and Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U. S. 477 (1981). The Illinois Supreme Court held that Smith’s responses to continued police questioning rendered his initial request for counsel “ambiguous,” and that the officers therefore were not required to terminate their questioning. 102 Ill. 2d 365, 373-374, 466 N. E. 2d 236, 240 (1984). Under Miranda and Edwards, however, an accused’s postrequest responses to further interrogation may not be used to cast doubt on the clarity of his initial request for counsel. Finding no ambiguity in Smith’s initial request, we accordingly grant the petition and reverse. I Shortly after his arrest, 18-year-old Steven Smith was taken to an interrogation room at the Logan County Safety Complex for questioning by two police detectives. The session began as follows: “Q. Steve, I want to talk with you in reference to the armed robbery that took place at McDonald’s restaurant on the morning of the 19th. Are you familiar with this? “A. Yeah. My cousin Greg was. “Q. Okay. But before I do that I must advise you…
Excerpt of a 26,881-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.