Fellers v. United States Case Brief

Why is the case important?

After being indicted, the petitioner was arrested, making exculpatory statements at the time.

Facts of the case

“After a grand jury indicted Fellers, police arrested him at home. Fellers made incriminating statements during the arrest. Police officially interrogated Fellers at county jail and told him of his Miranda rights. Fellers signed a waiver of these rights and restated incriminating statements he had made at home. Fellers later argued that, when he was arrested in his home without a lawyer, police “”deliberately elicited”” incriminating statements. Pointing to his Sixth Amendment right to counsel, Fellers argued it would be unconstitutional to admit at trial his incriminating statements made in jail, because these were the “”fruits”” of comments made at home without a lawyer.Fellers was convicted in federal district court. A federal appellate court affirmed the conviction and ruled that officers did not violate Fellers’ Sixth Amendment right to counsel either at home or in the jailhouse.”


Whether the initial arrest was an interrogation.


Yes. The Supreme Court held that there is no question that officers in this case ‘deliberately elicited’ information from petitioner. Indeed, the officers.

  • “”>



    • Case Brief: 2004
    • Petitioner: John J. Fellers
    • Respondent: United States
    • Decided by: Rehnquist Court

    Citation: 540 US 519 (2004)
    Granted Mar 10, 2003
    Argued: Dec 10, 2003
    Decided: Jan 26, 2004