Lynumn v. Illinois

372 U.S. 528 (1963)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Police officers arrested James Zeno for unlawful possession of narcotics. They told him that if he 'would set somebody up for them, they would go light' on him. He agreed to 'cooperate' and telephoned the D, telling her that he was coming over to her apartment. Zeno emerged from D's third-floor apartment with a package containing marijuana. D was placed under arrest. D denied she had sold the marijuana to Zeno, insisting that while he was in her apartment Zeno had merely repaid a loan. After further conversations, she admitted the crime. D testified at the trial that she had not in fact sold any marijuana to Zeno and that Zeno had merely repaid a long-standing loan. She also testified that she had told the officers that she had sold Zeno marijuana, describing the circumstances under which this statement was made. The officer started telling D she could get 10 years and her children could be taken away, and after she got out they would be taken away and strangers would have them, and if I could cooperate he would see they weren't; and he would recommend leniency and I had better do what they told me if I wanted to see my kids again. The two children are three and four years old. Their father is dead. D stated she loved her children very much, had never been arrested for anything before, and did not know how much power a policeman had in a recommendation to the State's Attorney or to the Court. She did not know that a Court and a State's Attorney are not bound by a police officer's recommendations. D believed that if she cooperated with them and answered the questions the way they wanted her, she believed that she would not be prosecuted. D claimed she lied to the police so her children would not be taken from her. The officers did not deny that these were the circumstances under which D told them that she had sold marijuana to Zeno. The officers corroborated her testimony. They promised leniency if she cooperated. D was convicted and the appeals court affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.