Document: 336 U.S. 684 69 S.Ct. 834 93 L.Ed. 974 WADEv.HUNTER, Warden. No. 427. Argued March 7, 1949. Decided April 25, Rehearing Denied May 31, See 337 921, 1152. Messrs. R. T. Brewster, of Kansas City, Mo., and N. E. Snyder, Kan., for petitioner. Mr. Oscar Davis, Washington, D.C., respondent. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion Court. 1 The Fifth Amendment to Constitution provides that a person shall not 'be twice put in jeopardy life or limb' same offense. petitioner, now prison under court-martial conviction serious offense, contends he is entitled his freedom because another had previously him first was dissolved by convening authority before court reached decision. Government Amendment's double-jeopardy provision, if applicable military courts, did bar second here because, as views record, dissolution dictated pressing tactical situation. circumstances from which these contentions arise are follows. 2 13, 1945, American troops 76th Infantry Division entered Krov, Germany. next afternoon two German women were raped men uniforms. Several days later petitioner soldier arrested upon charges they committed offenses. Two weeks later, 27, advanced about 22 miles farther into Germany place called Pfalzfeld. On date at Pfalzfeld other on trial general convened order Commanding General soldiers attached.1 After hearing evidence arguments counsel, closed consider case. Later day reopened announced would be continued until fixed judge advocate. reason continuance desire hear witnesses then available deciding guilt innocence accused.2 3 A week withdrew directing it take no further proceedings. transmitted Third Army with recommendations new court-martial. transferring explained communication was: 4 'The case referred commenced. witnesses, mother father victim alleged rape, unable present due sickness, Court so their testimony could obtained. Due situation distance residence such has become great cannot compl ted within reasonable time.' 5 concluded 'tactical situation' command its 'considerable distance' Krov made impracticable conduct Accordingly, turn Fifteenth stating this action necessary carry out policy Europe accelerate prompt trials 'in immediate vicinity offenses.' Pursuant transmittal, point forty Krov. Petitioner, represented filed plea alleging been proceedings tried again. His overruled, tried, followed. He sentenced dishonorable discharge, forfeiture all pay allowances, imprisonment, imprisonment reduced twenty years.3 6 exhausting right review, brought habeas corpus proceeding federal district court. That ordered release, holding former should have sustained. 72 F.Supp. 755. Appeals reversed, one dissenting. 10 Cir., 169 F.2d 973. We hold shown, provision petitioner's court-martial.4 7 interpretation application bene considered chiefly civil rather than Past cases decided defendant, jury, may subjected kind 'jeopardy' bars offense even though discontinued without verdict. Kepner v. United States, 195 100, 128, 24 797, 804, 49 114, Ann.Cas. 655; cf. Palko Connecticut, 302 319, 322—323, 58 149, 150, 82 288. true where trying jury fails some enter judgment. McCarthy Zerbst, 85 640, 642. Amendment, however, does mean every time defendant competent tribunal go free end final Such rule create an insuperable obstacle administration justice many there semblance type oppressive practices prohibition aimed. There unforeseeable during making completion impossible, failure agree In event purpose law protect society those guilty crimes frequently frustrated denying courts power And instances discovered facts indicated more members might biased against defendant. It settled duty discharge direct retrial.5 What said enough show defendant's valued completed particular must subordinated public's interest fair designed just judgments. 8 When requires question persons conversant factors relevant determination. guiding determining when outlined States Perez, 9 Wheat. 579, 165. consent discharged agree. claimed again prayed matter right. answering claim said, page 580: '* * think, nature, invested Courts giving any verdict whenever, opinion, taking consideration, manifest necessity act, ends public otherwise defeated. They exercise sound discretion subject; impossible define circumstances, render proper interfere. To sure, ought used greatest caution, urgent very plain obvious causes; and, capital especially, extremely careful how interfere chances life, favour prisoner. But, after all, discharge; security faithful, sound, conscientious discretion, rests, this, cases, responsibility Judges, oaths office. *' Perez basis decisions double jeopardy.6 attempts lay down rigid formula. Under can doing, discontinue defeat justice. see why broad test applied whether runs counter jeopardy. Measured we adhere, intent Amendment. 11 went beyond powers temporarily continuing obtain benefit witnesses.7 But District viewed record showing only dissolving t get witnesses. This purpose, held, 'imperious' 'urgent necessity' came recognized exception provision. Cornero 48 69, 74 A.L.R. 797. urged apply here. asked adopt absence never justify discontinuance trial. formula inconsistent principles decision adhere. Those considering terminated judgment 'all account' thereby forbid mechanical abstract value thus lies capacity informed widely different injury defendants interest. 12 Furthermore, sufficient rapidly advancing army responsible withdrawal appears transmittal charges. who also most effective employment carrying plan invasion intimation require transfer order. composed officers invading Division. Momentous issues hung assume needed perform functions. presiding accepted discontinuing presents extraordinary reasons courts. At least, bad faith part General, attempt review on-the-spot required 13 Affirmed. 14 MURPHY, whom DOUGLAS RUTLEDGE agree, 15 I below civil, meaning attaches begins evidence. valid charge pending concerned, jurisdiction subject-matter 16 introduced; fact, both sides presentation submitted oral argument, opened own motion, three named expected shed light identification. 17 unit comprising court-martial, papers Army, 'with recommendation eneral court-martial.' subsequently transferred Petitioner convicted, overruled based prior proceeding. Staff Judge Advocate, approved finding period confinement years. assigned Board Review 4, consisting Advocates Branch Office Advocate European Theater. Board, sitting Paris, close scene operations, unanimous effect sustained1 consequently legally insufficient support findings sentence. Assistant dissenting sentence confirmed agreed 18 doubt Wade placed holds Officer, assessing situation, deprive being With reading harassment repeatedly less advancing. guarantee eroded away tide plausible-appearing exceptions. allow temporizing basic rights declares. Adaptations exigencies situations prerogative commander field, but price expediency compliance Constitution. reverse below. 92d Article War, U.S.C. § 1564, U.S.C.A. 1564. 'Law Member: desires case, secure will continued. like Court, parents accusation, Rosa Glowsky, sister-in-law room assist identification identity accused. set T.(rial) J.(udge) A.(dvocate)' acquitted acting advocate reviewing said: 'Four German, positively identified accused Wade. failed identify' soldier. Our makes unnecessary following questions discussed Government's brief: (1) what extent court-martial's overruling subject collateral attack Carter McClaughry, 183 365, 390, 181, 191, 46 236, Grafton 206 333, 352—353, 27 749, 754, 51 1084, 640; Sunal Large, 332 174, collected n. 8, 179, 67 1588, 1591, 91 1982. (2) validity Fortieth 41 Stat. 795, 1511, 1511. article follows: 'No shall, consent, offense; proeeding found specification held sense one, confirming taken case.' Simmons 142 148, 154, 171, 172, 35 968; Thompson 155 271, 273 274, 73, 74, 39 146. See, e.g., Logan 144 263, 297—298, 617, 627—628, 36 429; Keerl Montana, 213 135, 137, 29 469, 470, 53 734; Lovato New Mexico, 242 199, 37 107, 61 244. Manual Courts-Martial, par. 75a (1928), recommends ' determination issue it, ordinarily should, appropriate view obtaining additional advisable may, instance, recall witness, summon make investigation inquiry along certain lines discovering producing evidence.' reads 'We nothing renders shown emergent Federal Their lie reach process, process respond, promises appear kept, ill trial; difficulties proof grounds termination prosecution. Imperious means sudden overwhelming emergency, uncontrollable unforeseeable, infecting judicial rendering impartial impossible. expediency.' Transcript Record, p. 75.

Category: 0