|
|
Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367 (1979)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367 (1979)
Scott v. Illinois No. 77-1177 Argued December 4, 1978 Decided March 5, 1979 440 U.S. 367
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS
Syllabus
Petitioner, an indigent, was convicted of shoplifting and was fined $50 after a bench trial in an Illinois state court. The applicable Illinois statute set the maximum penalty for such an offense at a $500 fine, one year in jail, or both. Petitioner’s conviction was ultimately affirmed by the Illinois Supreme Court, over the petitioner’s contention that a line of cases culminating in Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25, requires state provision of counsel whenever imprisonment is an authorized penalty.
Held: The Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments require that no indigent criminal defendant be sentenced to a term of imprisonment unless the State has afforded him the right to assistance of appointed counsel in his defense, but do not require a state trial court to appoint counsel for a criminal defendant, such as petitioner, who is charged with a statutory offense for which imprisonment upon conviction is authorized but not imposed. Pp. 369-374.
(a) Argersinger v. Hamlin, supra, limits the constitutional right to appointed counsel in state criminal proceedings to a case that actually leads to imprisonment. P. 373.
(b) Even were the matter res nova, Argersinger’s central premise -- that actual imprisonment is a penalty different in kind from fines or the mere threat of imprisonment -- is eminently sound, and warrants adoption of actual imprisonment as the line defining the constitutional right to appointment of counsel. P. 373.
68 Ill.2d 269, 369 N.E.2d 881, affirmed.
REHNQUIST, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and STEWART, WHITE, and POWELL, JJ., joined. POWELL, J., filed a concurring opinion, post, p. 374. BRENNAN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which MARSHALL and STEVENS, JJ., joined, post, p. 375. BLACKMUN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, post, p. 389.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367 (1979) in 440 U.S. 367 440 U.S. 368. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=7TFAK6UZDPK5TRT.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367 (1979), in 440 U.S. 367, page 440 U.S. 368. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=7TFAK6UZDPK5TRT.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367 (1979). cited in 1979, 440 U.S. 367, pp.440 U.S. 368. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=7TFAK6UZDPK5TRT.
|