Document: 417 U.S. 21 94 S.Ct. 2098 40 L.Ed.2d 628 Stanley BLACKLEDGE, Warden, et al., Petitioners,v.Jimmy Seth PERRY. No. 72—1660. Argued Feb. 19, 1974. Decided May 20, Syllabus. Respondent, a North Carolina prison inmate, had an altercation with another prisoner, and was charged the misdemeanor of assault deadly weapon, which he convicted in State District Court. While respondent's subsequent appeal pending Superior Court, where right to trial de novo, prosecutor obtained indictment covering same conduct for felony offense weapon intent kill inflict serious bodily injury, respondent pleaded guilty. Thereafter, applied writ habeas corpus Federal claiming, inter alia, that deprived him due process. The Court granted writ, Appeals affirmed. Held: 1. on charge contravened Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment, since person is entitled pursue his under state law novo without apprehension will retaliate by substituting more original one thus subject significantly increased potential period incarceration. Cf. v. Pearce, 395 711, 89 2072, 23 656. Pp. 24—29. 2. Since Carolina, having chosen originally proceed against precluded from even prosecuting guilty plea did not bar raising constitutional claim federal proceeding. Tollett Henderson, 411 258, 93 1602, 36 235, distinguished. 29—31. Affirmed. Richard N. League, Raleigh, N.C., petitioners. James E. Keenan, Durham, respondent. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered opinion 1 serving term imprisonment penitentiary, Perry became involved inmate. A warrant issued, charging N.C.Gen.Stat. § 14—33(b)(1) (1969). Under law, Division General has exclusive jurisdiction misdemeanors. 7A—272. Following jury Northampton County, this given six-month sentence, be served after completion then serving. 2 filed notice County §§ 7A—290, 15—177.1. absolute, there being no need appellant allege error When taken, statutory scheme provides slate wiped clean; prior conviction annulled, prosecution defense begin anew Court.1 3 After filing appeal, but appearance grand jury, 14 32(a) covered been tried entered sentenced five seven years concurrently identical sentence serving.2 4 number months later, application United States Eastern Carolina. He claimed constituted double jeopardy also process law. In unreported opinion, dismissed petition failure exhaust available remedies. Fourth Circuit reversed, holding resort courts would futile, because Supreme consistently rejected claims presented petition. 453 F.2d 856.3 case remanded further proceedings. 5 On remand, writ. It held bringing violated Perry's rights Double Jeopardy Fifth made applicable through Benton Maryland, 784, 2056, 707. not, waived raise affirmed judgment brief per curiam opinion. We certiorari, 414 908, 218, 38 145, consider seemingly important issues case. 6 * As directs two independent attacks upon haling into court took conviction. First, contends placed jeopardy, already lesser included Second, urges penalty exercising Amendment.4 find it necessary reach only latter claim. 7 arguments are derived substantially 656, its progeny. considered problems when, following successful reconviction, criminal defendant subjected greater punishment than imposed at first trial. we concluded such harsher absolutely either or Clause, emphasized 'imposition successfully pursued collateral remedy . violation law.' Id., 724, 2080. Because 'vindictiveness attacked must play part receives new trial,' id., 725, 2080, could retrial unless sentencing judge certain specified findings record. 8 Colten Kentucky, 407 104, 92 1953, 32 584, called decide applicability Pearce Kentucky's two-tiered system adjudication. like allows inferior seek general jurisdiction.5 Constitution prevented jurisdiction, imposing excess This analogy. Emphasizing directed insuring absence 'vindictiveness' who initial found dangers greatly minimized facts Colten. contrast whose prompted appellate reversal; thus, little possibility have motivated personal vindictiveness judge. Hence, thought prophylactic rule unnecessary context 9 decision again interpreted last Term Chaffin Stynchcombe, 412 17, 1977, 714, setting Georgia's responsibility entrusted jury. Upon reversal conviction, reconvicted Concentrating issue vindictiveness, rule. noted second completely unaware hardly sought 'punish' appeal. Moreover, unlike reversed stake any motivation discourage defendants seeking review. danger circumstances 'de minimis,' 26, 1982, require adoption set out Pearce. 10 lesson emerges Colten, offended all possibilities those pose realistic likelihood 'vindictiveness.' Unlike cases, however, situation here central figure prosecutor. question whether opportunities as impel conclusion requires analogous conclude answer affirmative. 11 clearly considerable discouraging misdemeanants appealing obtaining expenditures prosecutorial resources before defendant's becomes final, may result formerly going free. And, if means readily hand appeals—by 'upping ante' whenever misdemeant pursues remedy—the can insure most hardy brave hazards 12 There is, course, evidence acted bad faith maliciously Perry. rationale our case, grounded proposition actual retaliatory inevitably exist. Rather, 'since fear unconstitutionally deter exercise collaterally attack freed judge.' U.S., think clear considerations apply here. one, subjecting incarceration.6 Jackson, 390 570, 88 1209, 20 138. 13 enter Carolina's hold, therefore, constitutionally permissible respond invocation novo.7 II remaining whether, contending petitioners rely chiefly Court's 235. 15 precise 'whether pleading advice counsel, later obtain release proving returned selected jury.' 260, 1604. answered negative. Relying primarily guilty-plea trilogy Brady States, 397 742, 90 1463, 25 747; McMann Richardson, 759, 1441, 763, Parker 790, 1458, 785, characterized 'a break chain events preceded process.' 267, S.Ct., 1608. Accordingly, when enters plea, 'he thereafter relating deprivation occurred entry plea.' Ibid. complaining 'antecedent violations,' 266, 1607, limited proceeding voluntary intelligent nature proof received counsel 'within range competence demanded attorneys cases.' See McMann, supra, 771, 1449. 16 petitioners' reliance understandable, fundamental distinction between one. Although underlying were dimension, none went very power bring brought him. example, surely use allegedly coerced confessions, tainted sort alleged 'cured' properly hand, contrast, infirmity markedly different. Having was, simply calling Tollett, violations' 'deprivation asserts today accept haled charge. initiation proceedings operated deny 17 Last Robinson Neil, 409 505, 876, 35 29, explaining why distinctive, 'its practical prevent taking place all, rather prescribe procedural rules govern trial.' 509, 878. based quoted language aptly describes based. 'practical result' dictated permissibly That so, follows foreclose attacking corpus.8 18 19 so ordered. REHNQUIST, dissenting. I difficult apparently does Part charges request defined 656 Still importantly, believe assert new-found action, despite marks unwarranted departure principles recently enunciated 235 (1973), trilogy, 747 (1970); 763 785 (1970). 22 notes, addition 707 Presumably earlier 'the incident to' 'not extent beyond (the court's) jurisdiction,' Diaz 223 442, 449, 250, 251, 56 L.Ed. 500 (1912), rests instead Amendment doctrine doing, too equates role prosecutor, natural adversary who, observed 27 n. 13, 1983, 714 'often request(s) (he) reasonably expect get,' passes lightly over reasoning 584 (1972), imposition two-tier appeals justice convictions, though might impose severe concurring 726, 2081, position exceeded guarantee jeopardy. But relying cases Ball, 163 662, 1192, 41 300 (1896), Stroud 251 15, 50, 64 103 (1919), specifically approach hold 'that neither provision nor Equal Protection imposes absolute reconviction.' 723, 2079. crequires And To make requirements met, laid down 'whenever trial, reasons doing affirmatively appear.' 2081. Thus avowed purpose fashioned judicial resulting longer sentences 24 theory practice expected influenced intervening defendant, least mandated reached identified wrong. cannot said For while present problem closely respect, not. elected initially prosecuted, well unrelated believed charged. Both stand benefit less burdensome procedures opportunity acquittal penalties. With countervailing once invoked vindictive indict convict crimes believes accepts equation here, reaches far wrong identifies. Indeed, puzzling follow Clause. '(t)he (respondent) law' sounds dressed garb. 26 If correct stating consequences upholding indeed lacked governed culminating (1973). doubt 'power' Henderson valid indictment; yet disability us merged plea. do see twin accorded. Kepner 195 100, 131, 797, 805, 49 114 (1904); Harris 237 274, 277 (CA8 1956); Kistner 332 978, 980 1964). 'just pleas direct inquiry merits antecedent violations alike forecloses discrimination selection 1607. Surely 'antecedent' invalid confession inadmissible impermissibly burdened Parker. reaffirmed principle represents say there: 28 'When solemnly admitted open fact charged, character showing within standards forth McMann.' 29 assertion somehow inapplicable goes 'to him' other conclusion. Any difference resolved way semantic. 'test' fails distinguish Henderson; provide reasoned basis questions speedy preceding recognized potentially major breach wall certainty surrounding sanction cases. 30 indication record agreement distinguishing seems insubstantial permit 'plea bargains.' event merely stands lose, accused well. great majority bargaining, class interest finality prosecutors. swept aside ease exhibited today, prosecutors reduced incentive bargain, detriment many whom bargaining offers hope ameliorating them III 31 But, if, believe, proper analysis produces agree gives, Imposition violation,' customarily guilty, separate legal determination analyzed terms quite different obtain. decisions lies defect remand consistent Rice, 404 244, 247—248, 402, 404, 413 (1971). Rice erred ruling authorized expunging Rice's Carolina: 33 'It clearer invalidate resulted .. short, resentencing; ipso facto required. Even higher vulnerable erased avoid flowing sentence.' 34 reaching claim, flowed service retrial, moot. Here, faced prospect self-evident result. maximum receive one-half years, nothing indicates that, grant probation. Nor record, contains fragment proceedings, verdict purposes information support augmented fact, actually should direction resentence accordance order annulling Respondent assaulting fellow inmate spite both other, well, matter, assure whatever POWELL joins generally Spencer, 276 N.C. 535, 173 S.E.2d 765; Sparrow, 499, 897. premised expectation serving, contrasted consecutive fulfilled, turned increasing five- seven-year commence until date October 1969. By time, some time Thus, effect concurrent increase confinement these months, opposed envisaged sentence. instructed await 434 297 (CA4), cert. granted, 401 1008, 91 1256, 544. challenge constitutionality enhanced adjudication system. vacating remanding consideration become 413. Subsequently, dealt issue, violate issuing granting relief. never required establish avenues review convictions. Nonetheless, 'it now established, kept free unreasoned distinctions impede equal access courts.' Rinaldi Yeager, 384 305, 310, 86 1497, 1500, 577. Griffin Illinois, 351 12, 76 585, 100 891; Douglas California, 372 353, 83 814, 811; Lane Brown, 477, 768, 892; Draper Washington, 487, 774, 899; 724 656; 11, 1981, 714. exhaustive list employing similar procedures, 112 4, 1958. putting side potentiality incarceration, 'felony' often entails incurred Special Project, Collateral Consequences Criminal Conviction, Vand.L.Rev. 929, 955—960; Note, Civil Disabilities Felons, 53 Va.L.Rev. 403, 406—408. O'Brien Skinner, 524, 740, 702 (involving New York retain vote). shown impossible outset, 500. battery. Subsequent victim died, homicide. Obviously, possible authorities proceeded charge, crime homicide complete victim's death. Contrary dissenting 'assure imposed' Post, 39. bars wholly precisely course invited, misconceive involving violative rule, resentencing order. Our denied length institution partial analogy progeny, remedied solely procedure 6, supra.

Category: 0