-
1967 BCE
Washington v. Texas, 6th Amendment, Right to a compulsory process to obtain witnesses for defense.
Jackie Washington was convicted of murder and sentenced to 50 years in prison. At trial, Washington alleged that Charles Fuller shot the victim while Washington attempted to stop the shooting. The prosecution objected based on a state statute that prevented persons charged in the same crime from testifying on behalf of one another.Chief Justice Warren E. Burger wrote the decision for the court's eight-justice majority. The decision upholds Washington's constitutional right to compulsory process. -
Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago, 5th Amendment, Eminent Domain
The City of Chicago wanted to make a bridge over private property, and a peice of property was owned by the Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Corporation. the city petitioned to have the land condemned, and it worked. They were rewarded compensation, while the railroad was rewarded one dollar. it appealed the judgment in violaiton of the Due Process clause of the 14th amendment. The court said that the railroad did not violate the 14th Amendent rights. -
Gitlow v. New York, 1st Amendment, freedom of speech
At his trial, Gitlow argued that since there was no resulting action flowing from the manifesto's publication, the statute penalized utterances without the propensity to incitement of concrete action.
Citing Schenck and Abrams, the Court reasoned the government could punish speech that threatens its basic existence because of the national security implications. -
Near v. Minnesota, 1st Amendment, Freedom of the press (prior restraint)
Minnesota's Public Nuisance law prohibited the publication of "obscene, lewd, and lascivious" newspapers. The state supreme court upheld both a temporary injunction and permanent injunction that was eventually issued by the trial court. Minnesota officials sought a permanent injunction against The Saturday Press. Justices ruled that the government could not censor or otherwise prohibit a publication in advance. -
DeJonge v. Oregon, 1st Amendment, Freedom of assembly
In 1934, Dirk De Jonge was charged with violating Oregon's criminal syndicalism statute. The State Supreme Court distinguished that he presided at, conducted, and assisted in conducting an assemblage of persons, organizations, societies, and groups called by the Communist Party. The Court determined that De Jonge's sole offense was assisting in a public meeting held under the auspices of the Communist Party. Justice Harlan Fiske Stone took no part in the decision of the case. -
Cantwell v. connecticut, 1st Amendment, Free exercise of Religion
Jehovah's Witnesses proselytized a predominantly Catholic neighborhood. Two pedestrians reacted angrily to an anti-Catholic message. Newton Cantwell and his sons were arrested and charged with inciting a common-law breach of the peace. They were traveling door-to-door and approaching people on the street.The Court held that while the maintenance of public order was a valid state interest, it could not be used to justify the suppression of free speech. -
Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing, 1st Amendment, Government establishment of Religion.
Taxpayer Arch R. Everson filed a lawsuit alleging that this indirect aid to religion violated both the New Jersey state constitution and the First Amendment. After losing in state courts, Everson appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on purely federal constitutional grounds.The law was enacted to assist parents of all religions with getting their children to school. A divided court ruled that the law did not violate the Constitution. -
In re Oliver, 6th Amendment, Public trial.
In obedience to a subpoena, petitioner appeared as a witness before a Michigan circuit judge who was conducting a secret "one-man grand jury". After petitioner had given certain testimony, the judge-grand jury, acting in the belief that his testimony was false and evasive, charged him with contempt. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. -
Mapp v. Ohio, 4th Amendment, Exclusionary Rule.
Dollree Mapp was convicted of possessing obscene materials after an admittedly illegal police search of her home for a fugitive. She appealed her conviction on the basis of freedom of expression.The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that search and seizure evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment is inadmissible in state court. The decision launched the Court on a troubled course of determining how and when to apply the exclusionary rule for police searches and seizures. -
Robinson v. California, 8th Amendment, cruel and unusual punishment
A jury found defendant guilty under a California statute that criminalized being addicted to narcotics. His conviction was affirmed on appeal. Defendant sought further review from the United States Supreme Court.The Court held that imprisoning those addicted to opiates inflicted cruel and unusual punishment. The law was not aimed at the purchase, sale, or possession of illegal drugs. -
Ker v. California, 4th Amendment, protection against unreasonable search and seizure.
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to give lower courts guidance on decide when evidence is the fruit of an unlawful search or seizure. The Court declared that the standards of reasonableness are the same under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments applying in Federal and State courts. -
Gideon v .wainwright, 6th Amendment, Right to Counsel in felony cases.
Clarence Earl Gideon was charged in Florida state court with felony breaking and entering. Gideon represented himself in trial; he was found guilty and sentenced to five years in prison. He filed a habeas corpus petition, arguing that the trial court's decision violated his constitutional rights.The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a right to assistance of counsel applies to criminal defendants in state court. -
Edwards v south Carolina, 1st amendment, freedom to petition.
187 black students were convicted of breach of the peace for peacefully assembling at the South Carolina State Government. After their convictions were affirmed by the state supreme court, the students sought further review. They contended that there was a complete absence of any evidence of the commission of the offense.In an 8-1 decision authored by Justice Potter Stewart, the Court reversed the criminal convictions of the black students. -
Malloy v. Hogan, 5th Amendment, protection against self-incrimination.
William Malloy was arrested during a gambling raid in 1959. After pleading guilty to pool selling, a misdemeanor, he was sentenced to one year in jail. Malloy filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his confinement. Connecticut Supreme Court granted certiorari on the case.Justices ruled that the Fifth Amendment's exception from compulsory self-incrimination is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment against abridgement by a state. -
Pointer v. Texas, 6th Amendment, right to confront witnesses.
Bob Granville Pointer was convicted of robbery in 1962. Pointer and Lloyd Earl Dillard were charged with robbing Kenneth W. Phillips of $375. Dillard tried to cross-examine Phillips, but Pointer did not. Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Pointer's conviction. The Court ruled that the right to cross-examine is a fundamental right for all defendants in the U.S. -
Klopfer v. North Carolina, 6th Amendment, right to a speedy trial.
The State of North Carolina charged Klopfer with criminal trespass when he participated in a civil rights demonstration. At trial, the jury could not reach a verdict. The state moved for a nolle prosequi with leave, which would allow the case to be suspended indefinitely.Justices ruled that indefinitely suspending a trial violates a defendant's right to a speedy trial. Court noted that almost every state has rejected the Supreme Court of North Carolina's reasoning. -
Miranda v. Arizona, 5th Amendment, right to be informed of rights upon arrest.
Ernesto Miranda was arrested in his house and brought to a police station. After two hours of interrogation, the police obtained a written confession from Miranda. The jury found Miranda guilty. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Arizona affirmed and held Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated.The Court reasoned that safeguards were required to protect the privilege. -
Duncan v. Louisiana, 6th Amendment, right to trial by jury in criminal cases.
Gary Duncan, a black teenager in Louisiana, was found guilty of assaulting a white youth by allegedly slapping him on the elbow. Duncan was sentenced to 60 days in prison and fined $150. Duncan's request for a jury trial was denied.The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1971 that the right to a jury trial by jury in criminal cases was constitutional. Petty crimes, defined as those punishable by no more than six months in prison and a $500 fine, were not subject to the jury trial provision. -
Benton v. Maryland, 5th Amendment, Protection Against Double jeopardy.
Benton won his appeal on the grounds that the grand jury that indicted him and the petit jury that convicted him were selected unconstitutionally. The Maryland Supreme Court affirmed, following the U.S. Supreme Court's Palko decision, that the double-jeopardy clause did not apply to state court criminal proceedings.Thurgood Marshall authored the majority opinion. -
Schilb v. kuebel, 8th amendment, protection against excessive bail.
Illinois law provides three ways in which an accused can secure his pretrial release. All but 10% of the bail (amounting to $7.50) is returned on performance of the bond conditions. Appellant Schilb challenged the Illinois system on due process and equal protection grounds. -
Argersinger v. Hamlin, 6th Amendment, Right to counsel for imprison-able.
Jon Argersinger was an indigent charged with carrying a concealed weapon, a misdemeanor in the State of Florida. He was sentenced to serve ninety days in jail and fined $1,000. During the bench trial in which he was convicted and sentenced to time in jail, Argerstinger was not represented by an attorney.In Gideon v. Wainwright, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states were obligated to provide indigent defendants with counsel in cases involving potential jail time. -
Rabe v. washington, 6th Amendment, right to be informed of nature of accusations.
The majority opinion avoided the obscenity issue, instead accepting the Washington Supreme Court's determination that the film did not meet the definition of obscene. Rabe had no notice that showing the same film in an indoor theater was permissible but that showing it in a drive-in was not. -
McDonald v. Chicago, 2nd Amendment, right to keep bear arms.
Several suits were filed against Chicago and Oak Park in Illinois challenging their gun bans. Plaintiffs argued that the Second Amendment should also apply to the states. The district court dismissed the suits; on appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed. The Court reasoned that because of its holding in Heller, the Second Amendment right to bear arms applied to the states. -
Timbs v. Indiana, 8th Amendment, protection against excessive fines.
Tyson Timbs used his father's $42,000 Land Rover to transport heroin. He pleaded guilty to felony dealing and conspiracy to commit theft. The state sought to forfeit his Land Rover. Indiana Supreme Court reversed the trial court's order for the forfeitureThe U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause applies to the states with equal force as against the federal government.