Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 590

529US2

Unit: $U52

[09-26-01 10:36:40] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 529 U. S. 513 (2000)

515

Syllabus

The Court’s decision in Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277, nowhere
suggests that a reversal of the burden of proof is all the fourth cate-
gory encompasses; and laws that lower the burden of proof and laws
that reduce the quantum of evidence necessary to meet that burden
are indistinguishable in all meaningful ways relevant to concerns of the
Ex Post Facto Clause. Texas’ assertion that Fenwick’s case concerns
only a reduction in the burden of proof is based on a mistaken histori-
cal premise. And its argument that the present case is controlled by
Hopt v. Territory of Utah, 110 U. S. 574, and Thompson v. Missouri, 171
U. S. 380, is also unpersuasive. Unlike the witness competency rules at
It does
issue there, Article 38.07 is a sufﬁciency of the evidence rule.
not merely regulate the mode in which the facts constituting guilt may
be placed before the jury, but governs the sufﬁciency of those facts for
meeting the burden of proof.
Indeed, Hopt expressly distinguished
witness competency laws from laws altering the amount or degree of
proof needed for conviction. Moreover, a sufﬁciency of the evidence
rule resonates with the interests to which the Ex Post Facto Clause
is addressed, in particular the elements of unfairness and injustice in
subverting the presumption of innocence. Pp. 539–547.

963 S. W. 2d 833, reversed and remanded.

Stevens, J., delivered the opinion of the Court,

in which Scalia,
Souter, Thomas, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., ﬁled a dis-
senting opinion, in which Rehnquist, C. J., and O’Connor and Ken-
nedy, JJ., joined, post, p. 553.

Richard D. Bernstein, by appointment of the Court, 527
U. S. 1051, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the
briefs were Carter G. Phillips, Katherine L. Adams, and
Paul A. Hemmersbaugh.

John Cornyn, Attorney General of Texas, argued the
cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Andy
Taylor, First Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Eads,
Deputy Attorney General, Gregory S. Coleman, Solicitor
General, and Philip A. Lionberger, Assistant Solicitor
General.

Beth S. Brinkmann argued the cause for the United
States as amicus curiae urging afﬁrmance. With her on the
brief were Solicitor General Waxman, Assistant Attorney