|
|
United States v. Grayson, 438 U.S. 41 (1978)
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. Grayson, 438 U.S. 41 (1978)
United States v. Grayson No. 76-1572 Argued February 22, 1978 Decided June 26, 1978 438 U.S. 41
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
Syllabus
A sentencing judge, in fixing the sentence of a defendant within statutory limits, may consider the defendant’s false testimony observed by the judge during the trial. Pp. 45-55.
(a) A defendant’s truthfulness or mendacity while testifying on his own behalf is probative of his attitudes toward society and prospects for rehabilitation, and is thus a relevant factor in the sentencing process. Pp. 50-51.
(b) Taking into account a defendant’s false testimony does not constitute punishment for the crime of perjury for which the defendant has not been indicted, tried, or convicted by due process; rather, it is an attempt rationally to exercise judicial discretion by evaluating the defendant’s personality and prospects for rehabilitation. To the extent that a sentencing judge is precluded from relying on relevant information concerning "every aspect of a defendant’s life," Williams v. New York, 337 U.S. 241, 250, the effort to appraise character degenerates into a game of chance. Pp. 53-54.
(c) Judicial consideration of the defendant’s conduct during trial does not impermissibly "chill" his constitutional right to testify in his own behalf, for the right guaranteed to a defendant is the right to testify truthfully in accordance with his oath. A sentencing judge, however, is not required automatically to enhance the sentence of a defendant who falsely testifies, but, rather, the judge is authorized, where he determines that the testimony is willfully and materially false, to assess the defendant’s rehabilitation prospects in light of that and all the other knowledge gained about the defendant. Pp. 54-55.
550 F.2d 103, reversed and remanded.
BURGER, C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which WHITE, BLACKMUN, POWELL, REHNQUIST, and STEVENS, JJ., joined. STEWART, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BRENNAN and MARSHALL, JJ., joined, post, p. 55.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," United States v. Grayson, 438 U.S. 41 (1978) in 438 U.S. 41 438 U.S. 42. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=U3D71FATP9QI1BT.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." United States v. Grayson, 438 U.S. 41 (1978), in 438 U.S. 41, page 438 U.S. 42. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=U3D71FATP9QI1BT.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in United States v. Grayson, 438 U.S. 41 (1978). cited in 1978, 438 U.S. 41, pp.438 U.S. 42. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=U3D71FATP9QI1BT.
|