|
|
Peters v. Kiff, 407 U.S. 493 (1972)
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.
Peters v. Kiff, 407 U.S. 493 (1972)
Peters v. Kiff No. 71-5078 Argued February 22, 1972 Decided June 22, 1972 407 U.S. 493
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Petitioner contends in this habeas corpus proceeding that the systematic exclusion of Negroes from the grand jury that indicted him and the petit jury that convicted him deprived him of his rights to due process and equal protection. The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s denial of relief on the ground that petitioner, not being a Negro, suffered no unconstitutional discrimination.
Held: The judgment is reversed. Pp. 495-507.
441 F.2d 370, reversed and remanded.
MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL, joined by MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS and MR. JUSTICE STEWART, concluded that:
1. Petitioner, under the circumstances of this case, has not abandoned his challenge to the petit jury by failing to include it in the list of questions presented by the writ of certiorari. Pp. 495-496.
2. A State cannot, consistent with due process, subject a defendant to indictment by a grand jury or trial by a petit jury that has been selected in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner contrary to federal constitutional and statutory requirements, and regardless of any showing of actual bias, petitioner had standing to attack the systematic exclusion of Negroes from grand jury and petit jury service. Pp. 496-505.
MR. JUSTICE WHITE, joined by MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN and MR. JUSTICE POWELL, would implement the longstanding and strong policy of 18 U.S.C. § 243 against excluding qualified jurors on account of race by permitting petitioner to challenge his conviction on the ground that Negroes were arbitrarily excluded from the grand jury that indicted him. Hill v. Texas, 316 U.S. 400. Pp. 505-507.
MARSHALL, J., announced the Court’s judgment and delivered an opinion, in which DOUGLAS and STEWART, JJ., joined WHITE, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which BRENNAN and POWELL, JJ., joined, post, p. 505. BURGER, C.J., filed. a dissenting opinion, in which BLACKMUN and REHNQUIST, JJ., joined, post, p. 507.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Peters v. Kiff, 407 U.S. 493 (1972) in 407 U.S. 493 407 U.S. 494. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=JL9JL4JPCALEKC2.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Peters v. Kiff, 407 U.S. 493 (1972), in 407 U.S. 493, page 407 U.S. 494. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=JL9JL4JPCALEKC2.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Peters v. Kiff, 407 U.S. 493 (1972). cited in 1972, 407 U.S. 493, pp.407 U.S. 494. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=JL9JL4JPCALEKC2.
|