Document: 415 U.S. 449 94 S.Ct. 1185 39 L.Ed.2d 501 Joseph DeMARCOv.UNITED STATES. No. 73—5684. March 18, 1974. PER CURIAM. 1 At petitioner's trial, a Government witness who had been indicted with petitioner, testified that the made no promises to him respect disposition of his case. Petitioner was convicted and he appealed. Meanwhile, pleaded guilty lesser charge contained in superseding indictment; at witness' sentencing hearing, United States Attorney certain statements petitioner interpreted as proving prior testimony falsely trial. Without presenting matter District Court, pressed question Court Appeals. That court accepted tendered issue, examined transcript hearing which sentenced, considered Government's response Appeals and, although prosecutor's remarks were deemed ambiguous thought be 'close' one, concluded 2 Unquestionably, there promise testimony, Giglio v. States, 405 150, 92 763, 31 104 (1972), Napue Illinois, 360 264, 79 1173, 3 1217 (1959), would require reversal conviction. It is also clear plea bargain between some point, being whether it after or before This factual issue dispositive case, have better practice not resolve based only on materials then court. The should remanded for initial an evidentiary hearing.* We therefore grant petition certiorari motion proceed forma pauperis, vacate judgment Appeals, remand case instructions further proceedings consistent this opinion. So ordered. 4 Certiorari granted; vacated; instructions. 5 Mr. Justice REHNQUIST, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE POWELL join, dissenting. 6 trafficking illegal narcotics violation provisions 21 U.S.C. § 174 (1964 ed.). summarily rejected attacks sufficiency evidence convict him, dealt detail upon decides consideration by Court. As notes, 'factual issue,' ante, 450, raises whatever general importance law. Commonly I expect denied those reasons. 7 Solicitor General, however, has filed which, though entitled 'Memorandum Opposition,' incorporates footnote backhanded invitation follow course now taken. well established does not, least respond Pavlovian fashion confessions error General. See, e.g., Young 315 257, 62 510, 86 L.Ed. 832 (1942); Gibson 329 338, 344 n. 9, 67 301, 304, 91 331 (1946). believe could plainer than one invocation doctrine invited error. For may proper allocation factfinding responsibilities deliberately chose raise largely first time seek decision there. responded scarcely grounds any claim here. deny certiorari. * agrees basic responsibility district courts, rather appellate resolved instance dispute General Electric Credit Corp. Robbins, 414 F.2d 208, 211 (CA8 1969); Yanish Barber, 232 939, 946—947 (CA9 1956). See 5A J. Moore, Federal Practice 52.06(2) (2d ed. 1974).

Category: 0