Document: 399 U.S. 508 90 S.Ct. 2232 26 L.Ed.2d 773 Phillip MORRIS et al., appellants,v.Hiram SCHOONFIELD, Warden, al. No. 782. Supreme Court of the United States October Term, 1969. June 29, 1970 Robert G. Fisher, Baltimore, Md., for appellants. George L. Russell, Jr., appellees. PER CURIAM. 1 We noted probable jurisdiction1 and set case oral argument with Williams v. Illinois, 235, 2018, 586, decided today. However, Maryland has recently enacted legislation2 dealing directly issue presented, our holding in Williams, that an indigent may not be imprisoned beyond maximum term specified by statute solely because his failure to pay a fine court costs, shed further light on question raised here. therefore vacate judgment remand District reconsideration intervening legislation supra. 2 Mr. Justice BLACKMUN took no part consideration or decision this case. 3 WHITE, whom DOUGLAS, BRENNAN, MARSHALL join, concurring. 4 I agree should remanded opinion recent enactment General Assembly new bearing questions presented. 5 deem it appropriate state my view same constitutional defect condemned also inheres jailing failing make immediate payment any fine, whether is accompanied jail extends imposed person willing able fine. In each case, Constitution prohibits State from imposing as sentence then automatically converting into defendant cannot forthwith full. 6 As understand it, Illinois does mean who means but refuses neglects do so. Neither finally answer State's interest deterring unlawful conduct enforcing its penal laws through fines well sentences will justify 'equivalent' who, despite own reasonable efforts attempt at accommodation, unable secure necessary funds. But means, minimum, punishment criminal more care must taken provide those whose lack funds would otherwise convert sentence. 397 960, 990, 25 252. Chapter 147 Laws (approved April 15, 1970).

Category: 1