Question

precedent case worksheet - 6th amendment
name: maliyah myers
escobedo vs. illinois (1964)
danny escobedos brother - in - law manuel, a chicago convict, was shot and killed on the night of january 19, 1960. the police arrested danny escobedo early the next morning, tried without success to interrogate him, and eventually released him. ten days later, on january 30, the police interrogated benedict di gerlando, who told them that escobedo fired the shots that killed the victim. the police picked up danny escobedo that evening.
they then began to interrogate escobedo. escobedo asked to speak to an attorney several times. each time he did, he was denied this opportunity by police. upon hearing that his client was being interrogated by the police, escobedos attorney went to police headquarters and tried to talk to escobedo during the interrogation. the police refused to allow this.
when the police told escobedo about di gerlandos claim that he had been the one that had fired the shots, escobedo asked to talk to his attorney. the cops watched this conversation between escobedo and his attorney. in this conversation, escobedo claimed he had seen di gerlando fire the shots. escobedos statements were an admission that he had been at the scene of the crime, something he had denied before. he later confessed to being the one who actually fired the shots.
the supreme court overturned escobedos conviction and recognized a suspects right to an attorney during a police interrogation. the supreme court viewed the police interrogation in this case as more of an interrogation of a specific suspect than a general questioning of witnesses. escobedo had been identified by a key witness as the murderer and when police interrogated escobedo, he was a primary suspect in a murder investigation. the police believed that escobedo had committed the crime and were interrogating him with the intent of getting him to confess. this meant that escobedo had the right to protections of a lawyer, according to the sixth amendment. the precedent that was therefore set was that primary suspects, according to the sixth amendment, should be provided a lawyer.

Explanation:

The text describes the Escobedo vs. Illinois (1964) case. Danny Escobedo was arrested for murder. During police interrogation, he repeatedly asked for an attorney but was denied. His statements were used against him. The Supreme - Court overturned his conviction, recognizing a suspect's right to an attorney during police interrogation for primary suspects in criminal investigations under the Sixth Amendment.

Answer:

The Supreme Court recognized a suspect's right to an attorney during police interrogation for primary suspects in criminal investigations based on the Sixth Amendment in the Escobedo vs. Illinois (1964) case.