|
|
United States v. Washington, 431 U.S. 181 (1977)
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.
United States v. Washington, 431 U.S. 181 (1977)
United States v. Washington No. 74-1106 Argued December 6, 1976 Decided May 23, 1977 431 U.S. 181
CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
Syllabus
Respondent, who was suspected, with others, of possible implication in a theft, was subpoenaed to appear as a witness before the District of Columbia grand jury investigating the crime. The prosecutor did not advise respondent before his appearance that he might be indicted for the theft, but respondent was given a series of warnings after being sworn, including the warning that he had a right to remain silent. Respondent nevertheless testified, and subsequently was indicted for the theft. The trial court granted respondent’s motion to suppress his grand jury testimony and to quash the indictment on the ground that it was based on evidence obtained in violation of his Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination. The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed the suppression order, holding that "the most significant failing of the prosecutor was in not advising [respondent] that he was a potential defendant" and that
[a]nother shortcoming was in the prosecutor’s waiting until after administering the oath in the cloister of the grand jury before undertaking to furnish what advice was given.
Held: Respondent’s grand jury testimony may properly be used against him in a subsequent trial. The comprehensive warnings he received, whether or not such warnings were constitutionally required, dissipated any element of compulsion to self-incrimination that might otherwise have been present. The fact that a subpoenaed grand jury witness is a putative or potential defendant neither impairs nor enlarges his constitutional rights, and hence it is unnecessary to give such a defendant the warnings that the Court of Appeals held were required. Pp. 186-190.
328 A.2d 98, reversed and remanded.
BURGER, C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which STEWART, WHITE, BLACKMUN, POWELL, REHNQUIST, and STEVENS, JJ., joined. BRENNAN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which MARSHALL, J., joined, post, p. 191.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," United States v. Washington, 431 U.S. 181 (1977) in 431 U.S. 181 431 U.S. 182. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=L66ETV4G45XCD91.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." United States v. Washington, 431 U.S. 181 (1977), in 431 U.S. 181, page 431 U.S. 182. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=L66ETV4G45XCD91.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in United States v. Washington, 431 U.S. 181 (1977). cited in 1977, 431 U.S. 181, pp.431 U.S. 182. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=L66ETV4G45XCD91.
|