Escobedo V. Illinois Trial Summary

In the Escobedo v. Illinois trial, defendant Danny Escobedo was accused of his brother-in-law’s death. Leading up to the trial, the defendant’s brother-in-law was shot and killed. Although, Escobedo was brought in for questioning, he did not make a statement. When arrested, Escobedo was not informed of his right to keep silent. Escobedo was released from questioning with the help of his lawyer through a state court writ of habeas corpus. Several days after he was released, police arrested Benedict DiGerlando, a friend of the defendant. DiGerlando told police he witnessed Escobedo murder his own brother-in-law. After this statement, police arrested Escobedo once again, in addition to his sister who was the wife of the deceased victim. On the

From this information the Supreme Court of Illinois decided the defendant was guilty and convicted of murder.

Escobedo tried appealing the conviction which the Supreme Court of Illinois later reversed the decision of the defendant being guilty stating “'(I)t seems manifest to us, from the undisputed evidence and the circumstances surrounding defendant at the time of his statement and shortly prior thereto, that the defendant understood he would be permitted to go home if he gave the statement and would be granted an immunity from prosecution’” (!!!!!).

The defendant argued his case on the fact that a he was informed of his constitutional rights when arrested. In addition, Escobedo argued that Officer Montejano misinformed him when Montejano told the defendant that he would be released and only testified as a witness if he gave a statement to the police. He also argued that he was allowed to talk to his lawyer when he asked the police officer. The plaintiff argued that the defendant confessed to the murder by saying the “‘detectives said they had us pretty well, up pretty tight, and we might as well admit to this crime’" (!!!!!). The plaintiff also argued that the defendant had a witness testimony of the defendant killing his own