Document: 409 U.S. 95 93 S.Ct. 351 34 L.Ed.2d 330 Alfred David WEBBv.State of TEXAS. No. 71-6647. Dec. 4, 1972. PER CURIAM. 1 The petitioner was convicted burglary in the Criminal District Court Dallas County, Texas, and sentenced to a term imprisonment for 12 years. He appealed, raising several claims error, among them an allegation that trial court had violated his constitutional rights by 'threatening harassing' sole witness defense, so refused testify. Appeals Texas affirmed conviction, 480 S.W.2d 398 (1972). We grant motion leave proceed forma pauperis petition writ certiorari reverse petitioner's conviction. 2 record shows that, after prosecution rested its case jury temporarily excused. During this recess, called only witness, Leslie Max Mills, who prior criminal then serving prison sentence. At point, judge, on own initiative, undertook admonish as follows: 3 'Now you have been down Defendant. It is Court's duty don't testify, anything say can will be used against you. 4 If take stand lie under oath, personally see your goes grand indicted perjury liklihood (sic) would get it stacked onto what already got, matter got make up mind on. lie, probably going mean years at least more time are serve. also held penitentiary when you're parole wants thoroughly understand chances taking getting oath. You may tell truth if do, all right, but into real trouble. know that. owe anybody testify must done freely voluntarily with thorough understanding hazard taking.' 5 counsel objected these comments, ground judge exerting such duress could not decide whether or behalf, thereby depriving defense coercing refusing Counsel pointed out none witnesses State admonished. When indicated he nonetheless ask stand, interrupted: 'Counsel, state facts, nobody dispute it. Let him decline testify.' any purpose excused court. subsequent mistrial overruled. 6 On appeal, argued judge's conduct bias deprived due process law driving off stand. rejected contention, stating while did condone manner admonition, made no objection until admonition completed, there showing intimidated because 7 cannot agree. suggestion should interrupted middle remarks object is, record, basis waiver rights. fact Mills willing come do lengthy intimidating warning, strongly suggests comments were cause Mills' refusal 8 gratuitously singled one dangers perjury. But stop warning right refuse necessity truth.* Instead, implied expected went assure lied, prosecuted perjury, sentence conviction added present sentence, result impair parole. some threats beyond power carry out. Yet, light great disparity between posture presiding circumstances, unnecessarily strong terms well exerted witness' preclude from making free voluntary choice 9 In Washington v. 388 14, 19, 87 1920, 1923, 18 1019 (1967), we stated: 10 'The offer testimony witnesses, compel their attendance, necessary, plain defendant's version facts prosecution's where lies. Just accused has confront challenging testimony, establish defense. This fundamental element law.' 11 circumstances case, conclude threatening remarks, directed single effectively drove thus Fourteenth Amendment. might given guidance future cases, serve repair infringement Accordingly, judgment reversed. 13 Reversed. 14 Mr. Justice BLACKMUN, whom REHNQUIST joins, dissenting. 15 before us not, my opinion, justify summary disposition. Petitioner Webb (who, occasion, still another charge) apprehended owner lumber business. owner, armed shotgun, driven office three o'clock morning upon activation burglar alarm. entered building, observed broken window assortment regarded tools desk. men emerged adjacent room, gun fight ensued. Two intruders escaped, despite having shot twice, succeeded holding gunpoint police arrived. 16 Although proffered obviously improper, sufficient presented demonstrate depth prejudice requires reversal. prove far less offensive, understandable, if, example, brief, p. 8, prepared filed Appeals, known presenting alibi Against backdrop being caught premises apparently overwhelming evidence guilt, offset bare prejudice, I deny and, often done, remit relief available way post-conviction proceeding full evidentiary hearing.* * Cf. United States Winter, 348 F.2d 204, 210 (1965), Judge Weinfeld, writing Second Circuit, 'Once swears give truthful answers, requirement 'warn commit or, conversely direct truth.' render sanctity oath quite meaningless require adhere it.' Petitioner's assured 'unless previously interviewed found helpful appellant's cause.' Brief Appellant First Motion Rehearing 7, (Ct.Crim.App.Tex.1972). An hearing allow outline witness. A mentioned record. reveal events justified unusual concern about possible

Category: 0