Fellers v. United States, 540 U.S. 519, 2 (2004)

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next



Opinion of the Court

question here that the officers "deliberately elicited" information from petitioner at his home. Because their discussion took place after petitioner had been indicted, outside the presence of counsel, and in the absence of any waiver of his Sixth Amendment rights, the officers' actions violated the Sixth Amendment standards established in Massiah, supra, and its progeny. Pp. 523-525. (b) Because of its erroneous determination that petitioner was not questioned in violation of Sixth Amendment standards, the Eighth Circuit improperly conducted its "fruits" analysis under the Fifth Amendment. In applying Elstad, supra, to hold that the admissibility of the jailhouse statements turned solely on whether they were knowing and voluntary, the court did not reach the question whether the Sixth Amendment requires suppression of those statements on the ground that they were the fruits of previous questioning that violated the Sixth Amendment deliberate-elicitation standard. As this Court has not had occasion to decide whether the rationale of Elstad applies when a suspect makes incriminating statements after a knowing and voluntary waiver of his right to counsel notwithstanding earlier police questioning in violation of Sixth Amendment standards, the case is remanded to the Eighth Circuit to address this issue in the first instance. P. 525. 285 F. 3d 721, reversed and remanded.

O'Connor, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

Seth P. Waxman, by appointment of the Court, 538 U. S. 997, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs was Paul R. Q. Wolfson.

Deputy Solicitor General Dreeben argued the cause for the United States. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Olson, Assistant Attorney General Wray, John P. Elwood, and Joel M. Gershowitz.*

Justice O'Connor delivered the opinion of the Court. After a grand jury indicted petitioner John J. Fellers, police officers arrested him at his home. During the course of the arrest, petitioner made several inculpatory statements.

*Kent S. Scheidegger and Charles L. Hobson filed a brief for the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation as amicus curiae urging affirmance.

Alfred P. Carlton and Thomas C. Goldstein filed a brief for the American Bar Association as amicus curiae.

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007