ABSTRACT
Escobedo v. Illinois, is a landmark case establishing the legal principle that a suspect's confession is inadmissible in court if the suspect requests legal representation during questioning and is denied that opportunity by police. Even more problematic, Esco- bedo's attorney was at the police station that evening frantically trying to see his client. Warren Wolfson made contact with several layers of police hierarchy that evening, including the Chicago police commissioner, with whom he filed a complaint regarding police treatment of his client. In examining the details of the Escobedo case, the Court ruled that prosecutors in Illinois had violated the amendment by purposely keeping Esco- bedo's attorney away during interrogation sessions. However, the Court made the important constitutional point that the Sixth Amendment was applicable to Escobedo through the Fourteenth Amendment, which made the Bill of Rights and other rights binding on the states.
