Document: 386 U.S. 213 87 S.Ct. 988 18 L.Ed.2d 1 Peter H. KLOPFER, Petitioner,v.STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. 100. Argued Dec. 8, 1966. Decided March 13, 1967. Wade Penny, Jr., Durham, N.C., for petitioner. Andrew A. Vanore, Raleigh, respondent. Mr. Chief Justice WARREN delivered the opinion of Court. The question involved in this case is whether a State may indefinitely postpone prosecution on an indictment without stated justification over objection accused who has been discharged from custody. It presented context application unusual North Carolina criminal procedural device known as 'nolle prosequi with leave.' 2 Under procedure, when prosecuting attorney county, denominated solicitor, determines that he does not desire to proceed further prosecution, take nolle prosequi, thereby declaring 'that will not, at time, prosecute suit further. Its effect put defendant day, is, and permitted go whithersoever will, entering into recognizance appear any other time.' Wilkinson v. Wilkinson, 159 N.C. 265, 266—267, 74 S.E. 740, 741, 39 L.R.A.,N.S., 1215 (1912). But taking permanently terminate proceedings indictment. On contrary, 'When entered, be restored trial docket ordered by judge upon solicitor's application.' Klopfer, 266 349, 350, 145 S.E.2d 909, 910 (1966). And if solicitor petitions court 'with leave,' consent required reinstate future date implied order 'and (without order) have trial.' Ibid. Since either or leave, statute limitations remains tolled. Williams, 151 660, 65 908 (1909). 3 Although entry said 'usually properly left discretion Solicitor,' Moody, 69 529, 531 (1873), early decisions indicate was once aware would exercise control procedure prevent oppression defendants. See Smith, 129 546, 40 (1901); Thornton, 35 256 (1852). But, present case, neither below nor offers reason why petitioner should prossed except suggestion Supreme Court having tried obtained only mistrial, 'may concluded another it worth time expense effort.' S.E.2d, 910. In his brief Court, Attorney General quotes language support judgment. 4 Whether presently sustained courts under their conception common-law indicated court, transcript briefs parties case. statutory reference § 15—175, Statutes Carolina,1 which its face apply facts Perhaps procedure's genesis lies nineteenth century State's approving use leave indictment, although those applications were quite different period following enactment 15—175. Compare Thompson, 10 613 (1825), (1852) (capias issued immediately after leave), 170 742, 98 (1915) eight years taken, even though fendant had available 1907). 5 consequence extraordinary made apparent before A indicted misdemeanor denied opportunity exonerate himself held subject trial, objection, throughout unlimited restore calendar. During period, there no means can obtain dismissal calendar trial.2 spite result, both state fact, rely affirmance applied placed him, way violative rights. With we cannot agree. 6 This circumstances: February 24, 1964, grand jury Orange County crime trespass, punishable fine imprisonment amount duration determined discretion.3 bill charged entered restaurant January 3, and, 'after being * premises, wilfully unlawfully refused do so, knowing know license therefor *.' Prosecution began admirable promptness during 1964 Special Criminal Session Superior County; but, failed reach verdict, declared mistrial continued term. 7 Several weeks prior April 1965 informed intention session, petitioner, through attorney, opposed such open court. trespass charge, contended, abated Civil Rights Act construed Hamm City Rock Hill, 379 306, 85 384, 13 300 (1964). petitioner's opposition, approve requested so solicitor. declined make motion leave. Instead, filed continue yet term, granted. 8 August did list Klopfer's trial. To ascertain status expressing charge pending against him 'permanently accordance applicable laws United States soon reasonably possible.' Noting some months elapsed since professor zoology Duke University, contended pendency greatly interfered professional activities travel here abroad. 'Wherefore,' concluded, 'the general supervisory jurisdiction inquire regard brought 9 response motion, considered Monday, 9, 1965, moved Even proposed offered State, order, granted motion. appeal Carolina, deprived right speedy Fourteenth Amendment Constitution. acknowledged discharge nevertheless affirmed. concludes: 11 'Without However, understand compel state's prosecutor, court's approval, elects prosequi. one seems unable effort. 12 'In followed customary cases. Their reviewable disclosed record. affirmed.' 350—351, Court's conclusion—that afford affirmative protection unjustified postponement custody—has explicitly rejected every question.4 That conclusion also implicitly numerous reinstated subsequent term.5 14 We, too, believe position taken erroneous. relieved liberty merely because suspension permits 'whithersoever will.' public scorn deprive employment, almost certainly force curtailment speech, associations participation unpopular causes. By prolonging oppression, well 'anxiety concern accompanying accusation,'6 condoned clearly denies hold guaranteed Sixth Constitution States. 15 While difference what provisions Amendment, settled them recent cases Gideon Wainwright, 372 335, 83 792, 799 (1963), Pointer Texas, 380 400, 1065, 923 (1965). latter dealt confrontation-of-witnesses provision, said: 16 light Gideon, Malloy, cited opinions holding various Bill virtue statements West (West Louisiana, 194 258, 24 650, 48 L.Ed. 965) similar generally longer regarded law. We entitled confrontation guarantee guarantee, like compelled self-incrimination, 'to enforced according same standards protect personal rights federal encroachment.' Malloy Hogan, supra, 378 (1), 10, 84 (1489), 1495 (12 653).'7 17 fundamental secured Amendment. roots very foundation our English law heritage. first articulation modern jurisprudence appears Magna Carta (1215), wherein written, 'We sell man, deny defer man justice right';8 but evidence recognition earlier times found Assize Clarendon (1166).9 late thirteenth century, justices, armed commissions gaol delivery and/or oyer terminer10 visiting countryside three year.11 These Sir Edward Coke wrote Part II Institutes, 'have suffered prisoner long detained, next coming given full justice, detaining prison.'12 Coke, prolonged detention contrary custom England;13 believed delay itself, improper denial justice. explication Chapter 29 Carta, words right' effect: 'And therefore, realme, injury done bonis terris, vel persona, subject, ecclesiasticall, temporall, free, bond, woman, old, young, outlawed, excommunicated, exception, remedy course law, freely sale, fully deniall, speedily delay.'14 19 Coke's Institutes read American Colonies virtually student law.15 Indeed, Thomas Jefferson studied (1762—1767), 'Coke Lyttleton universal elementary book students.'16 John Rutledge South seemed law.'17 turn, bases liberty.18 Thus, surprising George Mason drafted colonial bills rights,19 set forth principle using phraseology explication: '(I)n all capital prosecutions,' Virginia Declaration 1776 provided, 'a hath *.'20 history evidenced constitutions several new nation,21 prominent Today, each 50 guarantees citizens. 20 reception country establish most basic preserved 21 For reasons above, judgment must reversed remanded inconsistent ordered. 22 Judgment remanded. 23 STEWART concurs result. HARLAN, concurring 25 I entirely agree result reached am subscribe constitutional premises based—quite evidently viewpoint 'incorporates' 'absorbs' specific Rights. sound doctrine. my 408, 1070, 923. 26 rest decision 'speedy trial' provision ground allows officials person cloud unliquidated indeterminate violates requirement fairness assured Due Process Clause need refer traditional concepts due process THE CHIEF JUSTICE. N.C.Gen.Stat. 15—175 (1965): 'A leave' shall actions two terms apprehended unless good cause shown otherwise clerk superior issue capias arrest named action reasonable believing arrested district. When duty subpoena witnesses indorsed indictment.' originally enacted 1905. oral argument, counsel could quashed contained vitiating defect. §§ 15—153, 155 14—134 (Supp.1965). expressly limited statute, extent punishment N.C.Const.1868, Art. I, ('Excessive bail required, excessive fines imposed, cruel punishments inflicted'). Driver, 78 423 (1878). Decisions up 'unusual punishment.' See, e.g., Farrington, 141 844, 53 954 (1906). limitation judicially determined. Rost Municipal Southern Judicial District, 184 Cal.App.2d 507, Cal.Rptr. 869, A.L.R.2d 974 (1st Dist. 1960); Kistler 64 Ind. 371 (1879); Jones Commonwealth, 114 Ky. 599, 71 S.W. 643 (1903); Barrett Md. 636, 142 96 (1928); Hicks Judge Recorder's Detroit, 236 Mich. 689, 211 N.W. (1926); Artz, 154 Minn. 290, 191 605 (1923). Jacobson Winter, 91 Idaho 11, 415 P.2d 297 (1966); People Bryarly, Ill.2d 313, 178 N.E.2d 326 (1961); Prosser, 309 N.Y. 353, 130 891, 57 295 (1955); Couture, 156 Me. 231, 163 A.2d 646 (1960); Keefe, Wyo. 227, P. 122, L.R.A., N.S., 896 (1908) (the violated undue bringing confined within custody indictment). Dicta Colorado, Iowa, Utah these position: see re Miller, 66 Colo. 261, 263—264, 180 749, 750—751 (1919); Pines District Woodbury County, 233 Iowa 1284, 1294, N.W.2d 574, 580 (1943); Mathis, 2d 100, 103, 319 134, 136 (1957). Pennsylvania decided 'right prison. Commonwealth ex rel. Smith Patterson, 409 Pa. 500, 187 278 (1963). Commonwealth's trying failure give notice complaint constituted process. Moreover, Rule 316 rules P.S.Appendix, authorizes dismiss 'reasonable rule legislation States, defendant, large custody, whose unduly delayed dismissal. Ariz. Crim.Proc. 236, A.R.S.; Cal.Pen.Code 1382; Ga.Code Ann. 27—1901 (1953); Code 19—3501 (1948); 795.2 (Supp.1966); La.Rev.Stat. 15:7.8—15:7.11 (Supp.1962); Me.Rev.Stat.Ann., Tit. 15, 1201 (1964); Mont.Rev.Codes 94—9501 (1947); Nev.Rev.Stat. 178.495; N.J.Rev.Rule 3:11—3 N.D.Cent.Code 29—18—01 Okla.Stat., 22, 812 (1951); Ore.Rev.Stat. 134.120; S.D.Code 34.2203 (Supp.1960); 77—51—1 Wash.Rev.Code 10.46.010; W.Va.Code 6210 (1961). Thirty permit official enter Legislation proscribe reinstatement Lawson People, 63 270, 165 771 (1917); Price Cobb, 60 Ga.App. 59, 61, 131, 133 (1939) (by implication); Newell, 117 So.2d 752 (D.C.App.Fla., Dist., Wong, 47 Haw. 361, 389 439 Watson, 394 Ill. 177, 68 265 (1946), cert. denied, 329 769, 67 130, 662; La.Rev.Stat., 15:328 (1950); 363, Montgomery, 276 S.W.2d 166 (Mo.1955); Golib, 99 Ohio App. 88, 855 Hobbs Murrell, Tenn. 152, 93 628 (1936); Ex parte Isbell, Tex.Cr.R. 252, (1905); Dudley 55 W.Va. 472, 285 (1904); Woodworth Mills, 61 Wis. 44, 728 (1884). Alabama Ala.Code, 251 Thus filing away discussed below. Of remaining McLaughlin, 293 218, (1928). removal indefinite date. each, situations where consented removal. Fewkes, 214 Cal. 142, 538 (1931); Dix, Ind.App. N.E. 261 (1897); Lifshutz 428, 204 541 (1964), 953, 1087, 971; Dowdican's Bail, 115 Mass. 113 (1874) (indictment verdict then accused); Gordon 127 Miss. 396, 90 So. 95, A.L.R. 1150 (1921) (consent necessary); Rush 254 641, 182 (1966) (but mental institution retired files). At Illinois imprisoned might consent. Kidd, 357 133, 244 (1934). overruled. Ewell, 383 116, 120, 86 773, 776, 627 U.S., 406, 1069. c. (c. King John's Charter 1215) (1225), translated quoted Second Laws England 45 (Brooke, 5th ed., 1797). '4. robber murderer thief receiver aforesaid oath, justices are about come enough they let sheriffs send word nearest well-informed men, back informing men them; bring justices.' Historical Documents 408 (1953). An example Commission Goebel, Cases Materials Development Legal Institutions (7th rev. 1946): 'The lord king beloved faithful Stephen de Segrave William Fitz Warin, greeting. Know appointed you deliver Gloucester, realm, prisoners there. hence company coroners county Gloucester convene morrow festival Holy Trinity twelfth year reign (Monday, May 1228), aforementioned gaol, aforesaid, sheriff Gloucestershire place persons attached account them. witness whereof, etc. Dated 20, reign.' judges commissioned terminer commission,' Professor Goebel writes, 'are crimes, treasons pettiest offence, particulars hear determine realm.' Id., 54. op. cit. n. 43. 55. 'Hereby appeareth,' paragraph, qualities, libera, quia nihil iniquius venali justitia; plena, justitia non debet claudicare; et celeris, dilatio est quaedam negatio; right.' Later 29, conformity promise King's 'commissions oier, terminer, goale delivery, peace, &c. clause, facturi quod ad justitiam pertinet secundum legem, consuetudinem Angliae, doe right, custome Warren, History Bar 157—187 (1911); Meador, Habeas Corpus 23—24 Quoted 174. Bowen, Lion Throne 514 (1956). A4 (Proeme). Rowland, Life 234—266 (1892). Va. Rights, 1776, 8. Del.Const., 1792, 7; XIX; IX; Mass.Const., 1780, XI, provided: 'Every commonwealth ought find certain remedy, recourse laws, injuries wrongs receive person, property, character. He freely, obliged purchase it; completely, denial; promptly, delay; conformably laws.' guaranteeing citizens Hanley, 337 149 608, 222 (1958). included New Hampshire 1784, XIV. Kentucky, Tennessee, Vermont, admitted Union eighteenth specifically constitutions. Vt.Const. 1786, XIV; Ky.Const.1792, XII, 10; Tenn.Const.1796, 9.

Category: 0