Kansas v. Ventris

Summary

The Court held that an incriminating statement deliberately elicited from a represented defendant in violation of the Sixth Amendment may nevertheless be admitted to impeach the defendant’s contradictory trial testimony. The constitutional violation occurs when the uncounseled interrogation takes place, while exclusion from impeachment is a remedial question governed by balancing deterrence against the need to prevent perjury and preserve adversarial truth-testing. The judgment was reversed and the case remanded.