Document: 378 U.S. 1 84 S.Ct. 1489 12 L.Ed.2d 653 William MALLOY, Petitioner,v.Patrick J. HOGAN, Sheriff of Hartford County. No. 110. Argued March 5, 1964. Decided June 15, Harold Strauch, Hartford, Conn., for petitioner. John D. LaBelle, Manchester, respondent. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered the opinion Court. In this case we are asked to reconsider prior decisions holding that privilege against self-incrimination is not safeguarded state action by Fourteenth Amendment. Twining v. New Jersey, 211 78, 29 14, 53 L.Ed. 97; Adamson California, 332 46, 67 1672, 91 1903.1 2 The petitioner was arrested during a gambling raid in 1959 Connecticut, police. He pleaded guilty crime pool selling, misdemeanor, and sentenced one year jail fined $500. sentence ordered be suspended after 90 days, at which time he placed on probation two years. About 16 months his plea, testify before referee appointed Superior Court County conduct an inquiry into alleged other criminal activities county. number questions related events surrounding arrest conviction. refused answer any question 'on grounds it may tend incriminate me.' adjudged him contempt, committed prison until willing questions. Petitioner's application writ habeas corpus denied Court, Connecticut Supreme Errors affirmed. 150 Conn. 220, 187 A.2d 744. latter court held Fifth Amendment's available witness proceeding, Amendment extended no him, had properly invoked under Constitution. We granted certiorari. 373 948, 83 1680, 10 704. reverse. hold guaranteed protection self-incrimination, applicable federal standard, erred invoked. 3 extent prevents invasion rights enumerated first eight Amendments has been considered numerous cases since adoption 1868. Although many Justices have deemed incorporate all Amendments,2 view thus far prevailed dates from decision 1897 Chicago, B. & Q.R. Co. 166 226, 17 581, 41 979, Due Process Clause requires States pay just compensation private property taken public use.3 It authority said 1908 supra, 'it possible some personal national also action, because denial them would due process law.' U.S., 99, S.Ct., 19. 4 hesitated re-examine past according less central role preservation basic liberties than contemplated its Framers when they added our constitutional scheme. Thus, although as late 1922 'neither nor provision Constitution United imposes upon restrictions about 'freedom speech' * *,' Prudential Ins. America Cheek, 259 530, 543, 42 516, 522, 66 1044, three years later Gitlow York, 268 652, 45 625, 69 1138, initiated series today immune every First cherished mind spirit—the freedoms speech, press, religion, assembly, association, petition redress grievances.4 5 Similarly, Palko 302 319, 58 149, decided 1937, suggested secured Fourth were protected citing 324, 151, statement 1914 Weeks States, 232 383, 398, 34 341, 346, 'the 4th directed individual misconduct (state) officials.' 1961, however, light decisions,5 settled '* right privacy declared enforceable through *.' Mapp Ohio, 367 643, 655, 81 1684, 1691, 6 1081. Again, 1942 prosecution non-capital offense, 'appointment counsel fundamental right,' Betts Brady, 316 455, 471, 62 1252, 1261, 86 1595; cf. Powell Alabama, 287 45, 55, 77 158, only last Term re-examined 'a right, essential fair trial,' made obligatory Gideon Wainwright, 372 335, 343—344, 792, 796.6 exception compulsory abridgment States. Decisions departed contrary expressed those cases. discuss forbid use coerced confessions prosecutions. 7 Brown Mississippi, 297 278, 56 461, 80 682, prohibited using accused's him. felt impelled, Twining, say conclusion did involve self-incrimination. 'Compulsion torture extort confession different matter.' 285, 464. But distinction soon abandoned, admissibility tested same standard applied prosecutions 1897, when, Bram 168 532, 18 183, 568, '(i)n trials, courts wherever arises whether incompetent voluntary, issue controlled portion constitution commanding person 'shall compelled himself." Id., 542, 187. Under test, officers obtaining shocking, but 'free voluntary; is, (it) must extracted sort threats or violence, obtained direct implied promises, however slight, exertion improper influence. *' 542—43, 186—187; see Hardy 186 224, 229, 22 889, 891, 46 1137; Ziang Sun Wan 266 1, 3, 131; Smith 348 147, 150, 75 194, 196, 99 192. words himself. inadmissible even so mild whip refusal, certain circumstances, allow suspect call wife confessed. Haynes Washington, 503, 1336, 513. 8 marked shift began with Lisenba 314 219, 280, 166, where spoke choice admit, deny, refuse answer.' 241, 292. See Ashcraft Tennessee, 322 143, 64 921, 88 1192; Malinski 324 401, 65 781, 89 1029; Spano 360 315, 79 1202, 1265; Lynumn Illinois, 528, 917, 9 922; 503. reflects recognition American system accusatorial, inquisitorial, mainstay. Rogers Richmond, 365 534, 541, 735, 739, 760. Governments, federal, constitutionally establish guilt evidence independently freely secured, coercion prove charge accused out own mouth. Since prohibits inducing confess 'sympathy falsely aroused,' 323, 1207, like inducement short 'compulsion torture,' follows fortiori forbids resort imprisonment, here, compel might secures guarantees infringement—the remain silent unless chooses speak unfettered exercise will, suffer penalty, such silence. This fortified recent overruling Wolf Colorado, 338 25, 1359, 93 1782, 'that State does admission unreasonable search seizure,' 33, 1364. implemented cases, security conjoined make exclusionary rule relied great Boyd 116 616, 524, 746, 1886, which, considering running 'almost each other,' id., 630, 'Breaking house opening boxes drawers circumstances aggravation; forcible extortion man's testimony, papers used convict crime, forfeit goods, within condemnation (those Amendments) 532. Mapp: 'We find that, Federal Government and, freedom unconscionable invasions convictions based do enjoy 'intimate relation' their perpetuation 'principles humanity civil liberty (secured) struggle.' 189 , 543 544, 183 . philosophy complementary to, dependent upon, sphere influence very least together assure either man convicted unconstitutional evidence.' 656—657, 1692. 11 returning free government,' 632, 533,7 necessarily repudiated concept mere 'best defended unchangeable principle universal justice, law proved experience expedient.' 113, 25. respondent concedes brief decisions, particularly involving confessions, accusatorial become part fabric society hence, States.'8 urges, availability determined stringent proceeding. disagree. Amendment, supra; Cantwell 310 296, 60 900, 1213; Louisiana ex rel. Gremillion N.A.A.C.P., 366 293, 1333, 301, prohibition searches seizures Ker 374 23, 1623, 726, Sixth enforced standards protect encroachment. policies itself, there suggestion if tribunal. rejected notion applies 'watered-down, subjective version Bill Rights,' Ohio Eaton Price, 364 263, 275, 1463, 1470, 1708 (dissenting opinion). If Cohen Hurley, 117, 954, suggest cannot survive degree eroded. What accorded refusing one's self, feared authorities. Murphy Waterfront Comm'n, 52, 1594. incongruous determine validity claim prosecution, depending asserted court. Therefore, silence proceeding justified. 13 turn petitioner's privilege. irrelevant statutory defendant long protects witnesses similar inquiries. Counselman Hitchcock, 142 547, 195, 35 1110; McCarthy Arndstein, 34, 16, 158; Hoffman 341 479, 71 814, 95 1118. recently elaborated content Hoffman: 14 'The afforded extends answers themselves support conviction likewise embraces furnish link chain needed prosecute. (I)f witness, interposing claim, required hazard surrender designed guarantee. To sustain privilege, need evident implications question, setting asked, responsive explanation why answered dangerous injurious disclosure could result.' 486 487, 818. 15 applying judge "perfectly clear, careful consideration case, mistaken, answer(s) possibly tendency' incriminate.' 488, 819. argues facts case. investigation course questioned Honorable Ernest A. Inglis, formerly Chief reasonable cause believe crimes, including gambling, being Petitioner appeared January both instances substantially selling 1959. summarized follows: (1) whom work September 11, 1959; (2) who selected paid connection date subsequent conviction; (3) bondsman; (4) fine; (5) what name tenant apartment arrested; (6) know Bergoti. ruled these defenses double jeopardy one-year statute limitations misdemeanors defeat growing five As sixth failure explain how revelation relationship Bergoti vitiated law. 19 conclusions Errors, fail take sufficient account asked. interrogation wide-ranging Hartford. admitted behalf oral argument—and indeed obvious themselves—that desired elicit identity ran pool-selling operation apparent apprehend still engaged unlawful activity, connect more prosecuted.9 20 Analysis concerning knew Bergoti, yields conclusion. context inquiry, should suspected involved way subject matter investigation. An affirmative well connected operated waiver reference criminal. 340 367, 438, 344. conclude, therefore, questions, 'evident (was) (could not) result,' 486—487, 818; Singleton 343 944, 72 1041. 21 Reversed. While DOUGLAS joins adheres concurrence 345, 797. 23 HARLAN, CLARK joins, dissenting. 24 contempt inquiry. State, whose laws embody recognize finding incriminatory. now holds adjudication because, decided: makes States; justifying judged upheld. 25 Believing reasoning behind Court's carries extremely mischievous, dangerous, consequences realm enforcement, I dissent. importance presented serious incursion time-honored, principles justify full exposition my reasons. I. 26 can read accepting fact rejects theory: via forms procedure embodied true deals aspect procedure, wholesale 'incorporation' requirements, logical gap between premises novel can, submit, bridged additional premise shorthand directive pick choose among provisions apply chosen, freighted entire accompanying body doctrine, enforcement 27 accept agree proposition continuing re-examination conception 'due process' required, development community's sense justice lead expansion affords. particular gives expression, reflected prohibit Government, imprisoning solely refuses give State.1 understand, re-examination, refer always guiding law, including, course, Rights, short-circuited simple device incorporating process, without critical examination, whole surrounds specific Government. consequence approach pertains inevitably disregard relevant differences exist enforcement. ultimate result uniformity, inconsistent purpose achieved encroachment States' sovereign powers dilution protections found Rights. II. 28 reaffirmed self-incrimination,' ante, p. 954. most fully explored 14. 1908, decided, adhered exemption states Constitution,' 114, 26; Snyder Commonwealth Massachusetts, 291 97, 105, 54 330; 464; 151; 1903; Knapp Schweitzer, 357 371, 374, 78 1302, 1304, 1393; Cohen, supra. none commitment oneself relevantly distinguishable narrow ground,2 perfectly clear regarded not, reasoning, suggests consistent line undermined concurrent doctrine areas seizure. That post facto best. Certainly intimation tacitly overruled. 30 trial. petitioners tortured hardly making artificial said: 31 (T)he withdraw here involved. compulsion quoted statements (from Snyder, supra,) processes called testify. Compulsion matter.'3 (Emphasis supplied.) 32 majority simply wrong asserts understandable 'was abandoned,' pp. 6-7. cited, ante 7—8, developed sweep anything proceedings. mentioned. (of coercion) set aside jury adjudge fundamentally unfair, common amount taking life 238, 291. adverted 'third degree,' e.g., note 924, 'secret inquis torial practices,' 152, 925. same; mentioned.4 So too 1202; 917; 1336. Finally, 'ours inquisitorial system,' concerned problem ibid.; includes nothing assertion 1493, 'THE FIFTH AMENDMENT PRIVILEGE IS (the) esSentiAL mainstay' system. 33 Adamson, explicit regard increasingly strict determining trial out-of-court undermining Twining. After stating clause protect, virtue existence giving testimony trials interference Amendment,' fear hurt, exhaustion. type falls scope process.' 54, 1676. (footnotes omitted). Plainly, lines distinct. 326, effect.5 few mentions. overruled sub silentio, rather fairness here. supervision procedures directly requirements entirely theory espoused majority. parallel treatment resulted demand both; automatic engrafting construing inapplicable onto unconstitutionally seized, 28, 1361, furnishes 'fortification,' 8, today's decision. passage M pp quotes, distinct bases courts: 36 struggle,' 543—544, 187.' 1692 (footnote 1691. 37 discussed Amendments, supports statement, basis extending elaboration Fourteenth; went along baggage. III. 38 previous discussion shows dictate Approaching broadly, equally plain exemplified reconsidered current standards, general theoretical framework today. 39 consistently accepted 'thus prevailed,' 4, 'old civilized Munn 94 123, 77, applications ascertained 'by gradual judicial inclusion exclusion Davidson Orleans, 96 104, 616. 'observance rules established jurisprudence rights.' Hagar Reclamation District 108, 111 701, 708, 663, 667, 569. Hurtado 110 537, 111, 121. 40 'This never attempted define precision law' *. immutable inhere idea government, member Union Holden Hardy, 169 366, 389, 387, 780. followed encompassed safeguards abusive governmental power restraints specifically Rights But, while provide historical traditionally fundamental, otherwise independent Amendments: (I)t so, nature included 43 Relying heavily Cardozo provided classic expression (including oneself) 'not essence scheme liberty,' 325, 44 reach plane social moral values pass privileges immunities over earlier articles brought absorption. These origin effective government alone. absorbed them, absorption source belief neither sacrificed.' 152. Further independence explicit: 'Fundamental liberty, thought shall rendered Scott McNeal, 154 1108, 896; Blackmer 284 421, 52 252, 76 375. hearing, moreover, real one, sham pretense. Moore Dempsey, 261 86, 265, 543; Mooney Holohan, 294 103, 55 340, 791. For reason, ignorant defendants capital condemned unlawfully truth, though form, aid counsel. pages 67, 68, 63, A.L.R. 527. benefit prosecuted turned situation laid us substance hearing.' 327, 153. 47 Cardozo's metaphor 'absorption' intended transplantation specifics soil Clause. For, plain, basically depend require 48 Seen proper perspective, generally given equal domains demands much tangentially us. toying assert 'rejected Amemdment Rights," 10-11. single 21; infra, 26, such, all. 49 attends points, 10, prohibitions governments moved tracks, reveal again usual ground squarely intermediate reliance Amendments. referred describe infringement, leave doubt nces 'shorthand' doctrines another route. 666, example, 50 'For present purposes assume speech press—which Congress—are 'liberties' impairment States.' 51 consider interests. Holmes, dissent, seems me, word 'liberty' used, perhaps somewhat larger latitude interpretation allowed Congress sweeping language governs ought govern 672, 632. Hughes, De Jonge Oregon, 299 353, 364, 57 255, 260, gave analysis: 'Freedom press peaceable assemply cognate fundamental. Cruikshank, 92 552, 588: repulican implies citizens meet peaceably consultation respect affairs grievances.' expressly Congress. mention argue elsewhere. violating lie base political institutions—principles embodies terms clause.' seizure already considered. former, fairness, views. proves rule.6 proceedings, assured 462, 1256, 'Due identical Fourteenth. phrase formulates rigid fluid envisaged Its rule. Asserted appraisal totality may, setting, constitute shocking considerations, fall denial.' (Footnote omitted.) Betts, same. conclusion, reached appointment indigent trial, therefore process. 342—345, —797. snatches. If, something derive principles, purports believe, precedent illogical once. IV. undiscriminating sound working field 59 concludes, almost discussion, justified,' 11. offers observation 'incongruous' governed tribunals. Such 'incongruity,' heart responsibilities congruent; Constitution, be. Why thought, priori matter, investigative respects Government? certainly follow deal requirements; construed different. pointed Abbate 359 187, 671, 729, principal responsibility defining prosecuting crimes.' endangers allocation prevention attention special problems group face. local unduly restricted, likely area vastly greater resources. shift, occurs, end serve weaken bringing closer monolithic federalism rejects. Equally alternative watering down restrict dissenting Aguilar Texas, 116, 1515, evidences danger imaginary. concurring Aguilar, ibid. 61 Rather insisting, rote, court, 'federal standard,' fulfilled inquiring proceedings below met embodies. satisfy easily 'absolutes' afford haven unsettling doubt. truer spirit constantly enjoins reading preferences himself put noted 'from antedating (the Connecticut) 1818' upheld incriminating qu stions. 223, 744, 746. Stating treating 'persuasive force' interpreting provision, particular, described quoting 225, A.2d, 747: 63 '(A) will sufficient. (He having) then (necessary judge) legal discretion whether, give, liability answer. 'must appreciable, ordinary things—not imaginary unsubstantial character, having extraordinary barely contingency, improbable conduct. think merely remote naked possibility, affected by, suffered obstruct administration justice. object party, inter alios, means penalties convert salutary abuse possibility danger, improbable, withholding ends justice.' Cockburn, C.J., Regina Boyes, S. 311, 330 Clancy, 482, 488—489, 148 551, 555. carefully above dealt 'Bergoti nowhere identified, occupation, actual reputed, record had. Malloy attempt On proper, Malloy's explanation, correctly 'chose keep door tightly closed deny smallest glimpse apprehended. complain none.' re Pillo, N.J. 22, 176, 226—227, 748. remaining majority's opinion, 12. All declined decide 'whether, face apart immunity hint him.' 227, State's clothe crimes pertain, rest basis. 227—229, 748—749. concluded, absence indication misdemeanor removed appearance dang r incrimination propounded 'In this, confounds vague possibilities reasonably appreciable ones. claims his, finespun outside chance envisioned. enough where, rational fears incrimination, themselves, 230—231, 750. 68 Peremptorily rejecting analysis creates 'finespun probable theory' incriminated With acquaintance says only: criminal.' Ante, 13—14. 70 treated length court's get shrift Court; takes majority, unfamiliar below, dozen conclude incriminating: prosecuted.' 13. understand anyone itself lacking fairness. truth standard—state federal—the proper. Indeed, indicated above, reason approvingly opinion. Brother WHITE, post, 36—38, viewed standpoint satisfied. bluntly, excuse substitute superficial assessment better informed No scans opinions objective eye 73 affirm. 74 STEWART important complex values, difficult me perceive served purporting prevailing incrimination—the applied—the stated witness' invocation automatically, more, accepted. W th deference, prefer permitting sought incriminating. final, qualifies citizen's duty evidentiary protest, desire inform, obloquy economic disadvantage future crimes. 337 137, 1000, 1005, 1264; Walker, 161 591, 605, 644, 650, subpoenaed retained answers, permitted meaningful determination incriminate. Queen 329—330 (1861); Mason 244 362, 621, 1198. permits determination. Answers prosecute claimant crime—clue evidence—cannot compelled, 'this confined 486, 621. Of disclose render nugatory. flat acceptance apprehension, test knowledge matters demanded witness. 814; Cf. 438. seeks achieves workable accommodation obviously competing Marshall entitles citizen, privileged accuse himself, disregarded. When propounded, belongs implicate witness.' Willie, Fed.Cas.No.14,692e, 39—40. retain form. refusals some, all, clearly privileged. November 1959, offense defined occupying keeping building containing apparatus. 90-day term, early summoned appear County, various ascertain associates initially virtually innocuous ones advised consult following him: 'Q. Now, you 600 Asylum Street, working? arrested, furnished money your fine Court? bondsman? 82 fine? Do (that 1959)? Bergoti? 85 ask again, Malloy, now, misunderstanding want know. Street working?' cited noting informing friends associates. 87 wholly face, finding, told, found, bore burden proving barred violation advanced courts, conspiracy felony unable violated yet one. Beyond offer speculative others, posed substantial Malloy. Theoretically, unknown conditions potentially rule, judge, becomes answering distasteful finds 'might (his 1959) (their names) assumption necessary persons, continuously crime. automatic. unrealistic peculiarly inappropriate Unlike known rackets area, 'broadly published police record,' felon. once activity—pool selling—a sentence. unlike Hoffman, indicates There cynical acts release 1960. Even persons criminals, sustaining unwarranted, order passing incriminating, asserting seemingly matters. Adherence form only, eroded application, auspicious beginning closely analogous situation, '(t)o continue honored lip service healthy thing run disservice system.' 351, 800 (HARLAN, J., concurring). comment stand defense assumed, infringe '(n)o himself.' 127—129, 960—961, 156; 330, 332, 674. Ten supported view. 797, 799, (opinion MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS). unpersuaded Kemmler, 136 436, 448—449, 930, 934, 519; McElvaine Brush, 155, 158—159, 156, 157, 971; Maxwell Dow, 176 597—598, 448, 454—455, 597; 96, 18. Spies 123 131, 21, 80. Privileges Immunities are: 588; 522 (First Amendment); Presser 580, 584, 615 (Second 348, 652 (Fourth 538, 122, (Fifth requirement grand indictments); 328, 153, 288 jeopardy); 595, 454 (Sixth trial); Walker Sauvinet, 90, 92, 678 (Seventh O'Neil Vermont, 144 693, 697, 450 (Eighth cruel unusual punishment). Barron, Use Tiernan Mayor City Council Baltimore, Pet. 243, 972, Marshall, speaking provision: 'Nor use, compensation.' E.g., 629 (speech press); Lovell Griffin, 303 444, 450, 668, 949 York Times Sullivan, 376 254, 710, 686 Staub Baxley, 355 313, 321, 277, 281, (speech); Grosjean Press Co., 233, 244, 446, 660 (press); 303, 903, 1213 (religion); 259, 278 (assembly); Shelton Tucker, 247, 251, 231 (association); 1335, 301 N.A.A.C.P. Button, 371 415, 405 (association speech); Brotherhood Railroad Trainmen Virginia Bar, 377 1113, (association). 27—28, 1782; Elkins 206, 213, 1437, 1441, 1669. Robinson 370 660, 1417, despite Eighth ban punishments. discovery extorting party's oath government. abhorrent instincts Englishman; American. suit despotic power, abide pure atmosphere freedom.' 631—632, 533. Dean Griswold 'I period crisis, striving community. reflection conscience, symbol stirs hearts.' Today (1955). further: 'Underlying excluding implicit house, room, suggest, jury, station. Frank enforcing compelling confess, regardless clarify assist significantly efforts comply Amendment.' Greenberg 918, 674, 1332, reversing per curiam, Cir., 192 F.2d 201; 1041, 1349, 193 Coffey, 198 438 (C.A.3d Cir.), approval Emspak 349 190, 687, 997, Appeals Third Circuit stated: 'in really apprehends permit skeptical; acutely aware deviousness detection approached obscure unlikely inquiry.' F.2d, 440—441. precise heretofore it, 17, issues precisely similar. broadly 'be proceedings,' 127, 960, recognized silent. primary authority, 'all have, time, varying uniform meaning, Constitutions, except Jersey Iowa, existing 16. Fourteenth, 17—20, do, carry implication oneself, 464, 17-18, recognizes defined, VIII Wigmore, Evidence (McNaughton rev. 1961), § 2252, effect create Clause, raised refusal Nothing 6, books, reversal par domination mob, see, 'is pretense,' 286, 465. 'And review, denied, infraction amendments. come concretely tenuous psychological assumptions forced definance exact deprived entitled determined.' Malinski, 416, 788 Frankfurter, J.). Palko, announced show gradually notes 12, 13, 1676; 1509.

Category: 0