Summary of Kirby v. Illinois, Supreme Court of United States (1972)

Petitioner/Defendant: Kirby; a victim reported to the police that he was robbed of his violet which contained traveler checks and a social security card. Two officers stopped the defendant and a companion and when asked for identification, the defendant took out the violet which contaned travelers checks and the SSC. The defendants were arrested and the victim was called to the police station and he immediately identified the defendant as one of the robber.

Issue: Did the defendant have a right under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to have his counsel present at his identification process which took place before he was formally charged with the crime?

Holding: No

Key Facts: In United States v. Wade and Gilbert v. California, the court had held that at a post-indictment pretrial lineup, the defendants have the right to the presence of their attorneys.

Legal Reasoning: The court held that since the defendant in the current case was not formally charged with a crime when the indetification process took place, the rulings of Wade andGilbert do not apply here. The court ruled that the defendant had no right to the presence of an attorney in the current case because the police was just conducting normal investigation to solve an unsolved crime. The court further held that if the identification was “unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to irreparable mistaken identification”, then the defendant could have claimed protection. But in the current case, the court found no such abuse of police power and the conviction was affirmed.