Massiah v. United States (1963)

Docket
199
Decided
1963-01-01
Category
General

Summary

Question: Are a defendant’s incriminating statements made without the presence of counsel after a criminal proceeding has begun admissible as evidence? May a government agent testify to defendant’s incriminating statements that the agent overheard, via an informer with an electronic recording device, without the knowledge of defendant, when the informer does not testify at trial? Conclusion: No, No. Justice Potter Stewart, writing for a 6-3 majority, reversed and remanded. The Supreme Court held that incriminating statements deliberately elicited by federal agents in the absence of counsel after the proceeding has begun violate the Sixth Amendment. The prosecution could not use these statements as evidence against Massiah. Justice Byron R. White dissented, arguing that the statements should be admitted because they were voluntarily made and not coerced. The absence of counsel was only one factor among many the court should consider in this situation.

View the full interactive analysis on SCOTUS Lens →