Illinois v. Perkins, 496 U.S. 292 (1990),[1] was a decision by the United States Supreme Court that held that undercover police agents did not need to give Miranda warnings when talking to suspects in jail.

[3] However, the Court ruled that potential coercion must be evaluated from the suspect's point of view, and if they are unaware that they are speaking to police, they are not under the coercive pressure of a normal interrogation.

[4] Lloyd Perkins became a suspect in a murder investigation being conducted by Illinois police when they received a tip from an inmate named Donald Charlton.

The details that Charlton shared were enough to make the tip credible, and it linked Perkins to the 1984 murder of Richard Stephenson in a suburb of East St. Louis, Illinois.

[5] The state argued that Miranda's requirements should not apply, because "Parisi and Charlton merely engaged the defendant in friendly conversation," and Perkins made his statements "freely, voluntarily, and without compulsion.

When the suspect has no reason to think that the listeners have official power over him, it should not be assumed that his words are motivated by the reaction he expects from his listeners.Kennedy also noted that undercover investigation and voluntary confessions were an important part of police work.

We have recognized that "the mere fact of custody imposes pressures on the accused; confinement may bring into play subtle influences that will make him particularly susceptible to the ploys of undercover Government agents."