Document: 334 U.S. 266 68 S.Ct. 1049 92 L.Ed. 1356 PRICEv.JOHNSTON. No. 111. Argued Dec. 11, 1947. Decided May 24, 1948. [Syllabus from pages 266-268 intentionally omitted] Mr. Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., of Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Frederick Bernays Wiener, respondent. Justice MURPHY delivered the opinion Court. 1 The writ habeas corpus has played a great role in history human freedom. It been judicial method lifting undue restraints upon personal liberty. But recent years increased use this writ, especially federal courts, created many procedural problems which are not easy solution. This case involves some those problems. Because importance and necessity that it lose its effectiveness morass, we have deemed wise to deal with at length set forth fully explicitly answers matters issue. 2 In 1938, petitioner was convicted district court Michigan under four-count indictment charging violations bank robbery statute.1 He sentenced imprisonment 65 committed United States Penitentiary Alcatraz, California. His efforts prosecute an appeal his conviction proved futile.2 3 Since confinement made four separate applications writs District Court Northern instant proceeding fourth these applications. Inasmuch as can best be understood light issues raised earlier proceedings, becomes necessary examine various detail. 4 1. first application prepared filed 1940 by petitioner, who is lawyer. sought release mainly on grounds certain evidence used against him trial had obtained violation Fourth Amendment judge improperly refused disqualify himself filing affidavit prejudice. important note did allege resulted prosecution's knowing false testimony. issued order show cause, return made, then traverse form 'Motion overrule Respondent's issue writ.' motion likewise failed aver call court's attention 'two different statements' chief witness, Fred T. Donner, 'methods * obtain' change testimony.3 There no indication given what 'methods' were. Donner's testimony attached exhibit, revealed Donner gone office Attorney talked assistant during interval between allegedly conflicting statements.4 5 appointed counsel request. Several months later, when matter came determination, entered denying dismissing petition. No hearing held, being solely basis pleadings. And findings fact or conclusions law were made. Nor written. Petitioner thereafter proceeded pro se. Among legal maneuvers, he moved rehearing. stated, motion, erred refusing allow appear testify personally before entering court-appointed attorney 'blocked your amended petition include additional points so they could reviewed appeal.' denied. 6 own Circuit Appeals. stated intended rely claim denied 'a fair impartial trial' after talking Attorney. Appeals, affirming Court's disposition petition, reference point; devoted exclusively original Price v. Johnston, 9 Cir., 125 F.2d 806. 7 Included numerous claims attempt secure certiorari reiteration deprived trial. According written argument, 'if perjured base contradictory witness completed all taken into private chambers there instructed say, said recalled stand second setting rebutted prior must either classed conspiracy forcing surely would giving appellant entitled.' Government's memorandum opposition dealt contention footnote. petitioner's 'is refuted excerpt transcript proceedings introduced part pleadings rebut but merely supplemented few more details affirmatively discussion prosecutor assist subsequent testimony.' certiorari. 316 677, 62 1106, 86 1750, rehearing 712, 1289, 1777. 8 2. 1942, several foregoing action Court, corpus. same well two principal grounds. new absent courtroom preliminary Commissioner. amended, contained allegation knowingly trial; nor refer any way inconsistent Moreover, mention such corpus.5 close hearing, discharged writ. Its subsequently silent question relating affirmed appeal, Appeals decided 144 260. certiorari, presented differing lower courts. 323 789, 312, 89 629, 819, 558, 650. 10 3. Petitioner's third August 22, 1945. denial based ground known petitions, making abusive 61 F.Supp. 995, 996.6 Leave evident, however, raise proceeding. 11 4. On January 2, 1946, alleged that, robbery, jury confused presentation perjury notary public, justified imposing general sentence counts indictment, count offense. After cause issued, 'That government employed trial, obtain conviction.' 12 respondent warden, through Attorney, thereupon cause. deny Government sufficiency absence supporting facts. simply incorporated entire record three asked application.7 petitions contain repeated allegations though 13 without opinion. difficult discover precise dismissal question. because nature warden's return, suspect thought time should urged time. nothing whatever indicate stemmed belief insufficient face obviously merit. 14 panel Ninth ordered up files previous directed brought argument appeal. submission aside assigned en banc. banc directing appearance reargument. 6, opinion, majority held circuit courts appeals power production prisoner person. One expressed view power, concurred discretion. Two judges dissented, stating grant requested relief; reach propriety exercising case. 159 234. 15 considered merits briefs respondent8 oral Assistant unrepresented argument. 5, 1947, affirmed, dissenting opinions. 161 705, 706. 16 pointed out amending conviction,' interposed wholly discharge. specific circumstances developed accordingly treated explanatory statement appellate brief course 'did take one only testified crime committed, see guns pistols attorney's office, about put back pistols, described them, do first.' 17 So construing allegation, said: 'The records disclose throughout represented choosing. since present al times hardly unaware incident implications, does make claim. showing apparent knew much misconduct occurred knows now. Yet reason excuse attempted advanced failure other petitions.' 706, 707. further 'Where husbanding onus may properly cast applicant satisfying Id., page valid failing question, conclusion reached abuse discretion hearing. Reference respect Salinger Loisel, 265 224, 44 519, 989, Wong Doo States, 239, 524, 999. 18 We review thus opinions member bar serve us. I. 19 hold resident command argue involving life That exercised sound court, grows portion § 262 Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C. 377, U.S.C.A. provides Supreme appeals, shall specifically provided statute, exercise their respective jurisdictions, agreeable usages principles law.' 20 An requiring presence As such, clearly falls within scope 262. Basic section, course, pendency contemplated auxiliary. Whitney Dick, 202 132, 26 584, 50 963. cannot independent proceeding; where complete jurisdiction already existing. occasion demanding arise pending compelling satisfies basic requirement 21 cna 'necessary' authorized interpret section mean if sense otherwise physically discharge duties. Adams ex rel. McCann, 317 269, 273, 63 236, 87 268, 143 A.L.R. 435. Rather, read calculated, judgment achieve ends justice entrusted it. words, available exceptional cases 'where, special circumstances, aid over fairly reasonably interest justice.' 274, 22 Exceptional situations might conclude person 'reasonably True, always submitted briefs. while indispensable, frequently usually desired parties. occasions deems essential had; indeed, request effect parties previously indicated willingness forego privilege. slated place, fairness orderly procedure demand both accorded equal opportunity participate difficulty, arises lawyer desires none represent him, adequately discuss facts issues. ordinarily designate consent, arrangement participation Otherwise loses benefits listening contentions, arguments counsel. Conceivably, prisoner's unduly prejudiced one-sided debate. orally less than enlightening detract justness argue. Thus satisfied respects produced designed effectuate plainly contemplation 23 remains seen whether purpose consideration 'agreeable law,' phrase At common variants See Blackstone's Commentaries 129—132; Ex parte Bollman, Cranch 75, 97, 98, 554.9 None seems devised particular producing England purpose.10 24 However, conceive issuing necessarily confined forms vogue English system. Section says 'law,' term unlimited law. 'law' static concept, expands develops arise, believe recognized country 1789, Judiciary Act containing substance existence. short, ossification practice century half ago. Rather legislatively approved source instruments 'the rational supra, 25 look themselves down historic usage regardless form, produce body proper most result afford swift imperative remedy illegal restraint With usage, entirely consistent. To alleges illegally imprisoned perform act intimately related complaint, relief secured. Such production, seen, Where case, principle left sufficiently elastic may, jurisdiction, effectively restraint. rigidity appropriate ordinary jurisdictional doctrines applied fluidity desirable statute Congress wherever purposes often little relation necessities require us variation modification established limit process. very breadth language follows write limitations fit make. 27 Formulation exist await cases. enough issuance law' sanctioned Only give our 'dry formalism sterilize resources courts.' therefore Code commanding heretofore assumed. Schwab Berggren, 442, 449, 525, 527, 36 218; Goldsmith Sanford, 132 126, 127; Donnelly State, N.J.L. 463, 472, 601. now translate assumption explicit holding. 29 deciding, emphasize discretionary. interests mind. If reflects something mere desire freed temporarily confines prison,11 capable conducting intelligent responsible secured inconvenience danger, factors found negative, decline produced. 262, justify indiscriminate opening prison gates appeals. 30 discretionary absolute right even court. supra. sharp contrast constitutional prerogative each significant stage felony prosecution,12 Hopt Utah, 110 574, 202, Snyder Massachusetts, 291 54 330, 78 674, 90 575, privilege defense Lawful incarceration brings withdrawal limitation privileges rights, retraction considerations underlying penal limited unqualified 272 394, 'plead manage causes personally.' extent permits conduct modified prisoners. Oral ingredient due process circumscribed prisoners reasonable dictates. 31 A determined below holding existed. go unnecessary here remand rightfully belongs II. 32 corpus, alleging conviction, dismissed 33 argues unsupported fatally deficient warrant summary denial. Cuddy, Petitioner, 131 280, 286, 703, 154; Kohl Lehlback, 160 293, 299, 304, 306, 40 432; Ju Toy, 198 253, 261, 644, 645, 49 1040; Collins McDonald, 258 416, 420, 421, 42 326, 328, 66 692; Hodge Huff, U.S.App.D.C. 329, 140 686, 688; Long Benson, 195, 196. 34 proposition apparently passed Court; sole complaint main us, relates factor collateral decision itself. address ourselves leaving free press objections adequacy renewed 35 noted, bare having brief. Whether expanded states meaning Mooney Holohan, 294 103, 55 340, 79 791, 98 406, need answer. decide treating amplification makes objection. dealing find undenied illuminates clear essence charge prosecution pressure bear altered conviction. Cf. Pyle Kansas, 213, 215, 216, 177, 178, 214. abused supported factual references. From detailed evident amendment point. proceeding, true, called statements claimed undefined trying formulated effort success. gave testimony; witness' event inconsistency raised, assume determination 37 Further elaboration seeking Both shift force story. noteworthy controvert until inasmuch foreclosed matter. completely 38 renders inapplicable reliance placed res judicata principle, refusal bearing weight later raising considered. refusals Waley 101, 964, 1302. 39 Likewise irrelevant offered proof support ground. theory good relied full offer point accessible times. intending ground, faith required 'To reserve attempting failed, presenting outset offered.' 241, involved siu ation received point, avail oneself opportunity. distinguishing features obvious. 41 knowledge basis, least part, shows elicited information prosecuting lawyers interlude statements. manner described. utilizes acquired fraudulent attorneys. Judge Denman below, 708, 709: gravamen charged changed caused All accused single Obviously itself fraud. fraudulently done persuasion learned man penitentiary.' 43 unrevealed anything instance entitled heard Appellate determinations decisive vital rights crucial developed. Kennedy Silas Mason Co., 249, 1031. concerning follow amend upon, able adequate reasons earlier, just overlook delay. primary unjustly imprisoned. justifiable unable assert significance relevant facts, neither obtaining relief. 45 burden sooner which, borne proof, entitle Prisoners unlearned unfamiliar complicated rules pleading. impose them high standards art place members profession. Especialy true like imposition retroactive prejudicial inartistically drawn Holiday 313 342, 350, 1015, 1017, 85 1392; 214; Tomkins Missouri, 485, 487, 370, 371, 407; Rice Olson, 324 786, 792, 992, 1367. 46 chooses instead rests clarity particularity intolerable burden. acquainted Once alleged, answering proving answer inadequate, dismiss proceedings. substantial conflict, determine actual Appropriate action, shrouded ambiguity reason. fairer meet possible 47 obvious followed precluded development response too indefinite vague Merely quoting explain delineate explaining 48 successive prisoners.13 denials leave defend abuses encourages futile petitions. meaningful decisive, reasons. end, reverse consistent remand, unsubstantiated; discussed herein. bring focus thinks committed. respect, late date dispose ont develop eventually determines merits. problem Reversed remanded. 51 FRANKFURTER, dissenting. 52 I agree views JACKSON long-drawn-out justifiably merit face. ask state, however informally, newly discovered matter, or, event, certainly narrow broad protection serves. also attitude Alcatraz—or prison—to My difference bolt door undesirable practice, law, rigorous rule practice. depart ought foreclosed, contingencies easily foreseeable. 53 precludes definitive formulation precisely vindicating liberties. Sunal Large, 332 174, 184, 187, 67 1588, 1593, 1595, 91 1982. Therefore, preclude convict compelling. 272—275, 238—240, thing incarcerated acknowledge implies authority, granting review. taking Every legitimate safeguarded means consonant seemly administration justice. CHIEF JUSTICE REED join dissent. JACKSON, 56 unsubstantiated doing lack 'necessary exercise' 377. 57 typical prisoner.1 serving long armed robbery. Confinement enjoyable profitable. safe gives rise scruples magnifies old ones handicap preparation another. deficient, concoction another Under decision, applications,o r fatal. number re-try depends ingenuity, industry imagination. prisoner, eitht years, gotten around substantially retrial ten by, memories blurred, lost, dispersed. unaccompanied particulars serious officers event. Perjury terrors years' violence. Even honor exists among thieves precious sacrificed chance Consequently, varying run gamut perpetuated reports. 58 holds irresponsible, general, belated accusations tried out; further, perennial fill details, rules, actually filed. think (or rather, retrial) kind, unless prompting solicitation sufficient, proved, release. doomed ultimately fail; permitted litigation disclosed them. eight will period remote 59 accompanying convince justified, testify, necessary. bringing ancient origin. quite say layman's esense, settled record, suggested authority ordering jailer fetch statute,' stopped here, action. adds, 'which 60 believed former summon is, requirements met? Is jurisdiction? farfetched hold.2 do, appoint himself. defendant wants present, writing. Many fears refuse wish rest convenience egotism confers writ—it jurisdiction. me prisoners, whom forgives violating pleading lay ignorance, leading suppose, why today's revelation, whose multitudinous insist transported ruling open gate fruitless litigation. Admittedly, statute's requirement, viz.: met. latter clause sweeping power. Bollman (Ex Swartwout), 99, 554. Courts Appeal statutory exercise. cas authorizing overriding impose. employment never decisional3 cited. Yet, ignoring concludes anyway. subscribe sort 'construction.' line hands population unprecedented opportunities cases, try counsel, keep litigating sentences expire myriad strikes responsive chord escape. inflating beneficent liberty beyond eventual depreciation.4 §§ 588b 588c, 588b, 588c. (1) federally insured intent rob, (2) robbed putting employee fear, (3) jeopardized lives others dangerous weapon, (4) kidnapped guilty charged. Sixth mandamus enter dn ied 'no Eastern Michigan.' Moinet, 116 500. time, 311 170, 456, 729, 316, 474. acted unsuccessful maneuvers. Point V stated: 'Because falsely John W. Babcock, respondent's Exhibit 'A', falsely. calls Honorable Second part. Recross examination 24629. methods witness.' recross Part colloquy follows: 'Q. Witness, perhaps misunderstood morning. Did understand you correctly last night went department Justice, Attorney's testimony? A. Yes, sir. with? assistant. 'A. discussion, remembered things morning? yesterday, just—I nervous forgot Well, my recollection yours it, yesterday recollection, not? conversations didn't testimony, they? No, not, opportunity, wanted hadn't said. refresh yu recollection? just—there tell story, all.' connection withdrew amene d allowed, taken. behalf once briefly background reads 'Petitioner 'that questions 23268—W 10.671—R.' 23721—R. 23268—W. 'was corpus." Swihart 1945, 150 721. 'Since Walker 312 275, 830, denied.' authorities, quoted 995 (see footnote supra). concluded: R espondent, St. Sure authorities cites, respectfully urges discharged.' again quotation 7, concluded following statement: 'Appellee accord reasoning cited appellant's thrid hereby adopts toto sustain bar.' Blackstone describes versions writ: Habeas ad respondendum. Issued 'when hath inferior court; remove above.' satisfaciendum. plaintiff desirous superior execution.' prosequendum, testificandum, deliberandum, etc. wherein committed.' faciendum et recipiendum. 'issues Westminster hall, sued defendant, together day caption detainer, 'whence denominated cum causa,) receive whatsoever king's consider behalf.' (5) subjiciendum. 'great efficacious writ,' 'directed detaining another, detention, faciendum, subjiciendum, recipiendum, submit to, awarding Chief Marshall examines American system powerless enable motions Benns Mosley, C.B.(N.S.) 116; Weldon Neal, Q.B.D. 471. General Hunt, 147; Ford Nassau, M. & 793; Rex Parkyns, B. Ald. 679; Cleave, Dowl.P.C. 668; Cobbett, H. N. 155; Clark Smith, C.B. 982. felt lead wide spread *, items expense. hope added inducements legitimate; temporary alluring prospect, hardened criminal possibility escape lurks every excursion walls.' 237. Bell 129 290; Barber 142 805. discussions Dorsey Gill, 80 9, 148 857; Goodman, 'Use Abuse Writ Corpus,' F.R.D. 313; Note, Harv.L.Rev. 657. April, 1938. date, current took steps liberty: 1940, petitioned appeal; petition; dismissed. 806; 1777, announced June 1, 1942. September participated 260; 650, 29, Prior 995. January, 1946. 435, explained peculiar difficulties preparing bill exceptions. stenographic minutes typed. relator funds. bail fixed judge, custody prepare doubted 'whether (bill) ever heard. bar, danger certainty hampered." 'translates' 'assumption,' state dictum 218, this: '* public policy function whether, appears error prejudice accused, where, presence, proceed case.' 127, 318 762, 560, 1134, 799, 760, 1163, know precedent penitentiary adverse removal requested, it.' 601, persuasive technical right. 'translation' 'assumptions' involves, isolated 'usages Those terms admits These shadow directs meets statute. unauthoritative sources bad enough—but enlarge warranted. Reliance pronouncements, individually collectively, far creating precedents thin air. depreciation in. 313, stating, 315, 1937 1947 Alcatraz total 183 857, 862, 863, five-year Columbia; fild 27, 20, respectively; 119 597 average each.

Category: 0