Document: 412 U.S. 837 93 S.Ct. 2357 37 L.Ed.2d 380 James Edward BARNES, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 72—5443. Argued March 20, 1973. Decided June 18, Syllabus Petitioner was convicted of possessing United States Treasury checks stolen from the mails, knowing them to be stolen; forging; and uttering checks, endorsements forged. The District Court instructed jury that '(p)ossession recently property, if not satisfactorily explained, is ordinarily a circumstances which you may reasonably draw inference find, in light surrounding shown by evidence case, person possession knew property had been stolen.' Appeals affirmed, finding no lack 'rational connection' between unexplained knowledge stolen. Held: instruction comports with due process. Pp. 841—847. (a) If statutory submitted as sufficient support conviction satisfies reasonable-doubt standard (i.e., necessary invoke for rational juror find inferred fact beyond reasonable doubt) well more-likely-than-not standard, then it clearly accords 841—843. (b) Here, where established petitioner possessed payable persons he did know provided plausible explanation such consistent innocence, traditional common-law most stringent applied judging permissive criminal law inferences, and, therefore, 843—846. (c) Although introduction any evidence, direct or circumstantial, tending implicate defendant alleged crime increases pressure on him testify, mere massing against cannot regarded violation his privilege self-incrimination. Yee Hem v. States, 268 178, 185, 45 470, 472, 69 L.Ed. 904. 846—847. (d) In its legislative history judicial construction, 18 U.S.C. § 1708 requires only were stolen, they mails. P. 847. 466 F.2d 1361, affirmed. Malcolm H. Mackey, Los Angeles, Cal., petitioner. Daniel M. Friedman, Washington, D.C., respondent. Mr. Justice POWELL delivered opinion Court. 1 Barnes two counts forging trial court would justified inferring mail We granted certiorari consider whether this 409 1037, 544, 34 486 (1972). 2 at petitioner's 2, 1971, opened checking account using pseudonym 'Clarence Smith.' On July 1, 3, Disbursing Office San Francisco mailed four Government amounts $269.02, $154.70, $184, $268.80 Nettie Lewis, Albert Young, Arthur Salazar, Mary Hernandez, respectively. 8, deposited these into 'Smith' account. Each check bore apparent endorsement payee second 3 At payees testified never received, endorsed, authorized checks. A handwriting expert made Smith' all signed payees' names Lewis Herandez checks.1 take stand, postal inspector certain statements post-arrest interview. explained received question people who sold furniture door when them. further stated could name identify salespeople. Nor substantiate existence orders because salespeople allegedly wrote their scratch paper retained. admitted executed Clarence Smith but denied making endorsements.2 4 circumstance stolen.'3 5 brought guilty verdicts six counts, sentenced concurrent three-year prison terms. Ninth Circuit 1361 Because identical sentences declined challenges forgery counts. affirm. 6 * begin our consideration challenged review recent decisions have considered validity under Due Process Clause presumptions inferences. Turner 396 398, 90 642, 24 610 (1970); Leary 395 6, 89 1532, 23 57 (1969); Romano, 382 136, 86 279, 15 210 (1965); Gainey, 63, 85 754, 13 658 (1965). 7 supra, sustained constitutionality an tracking statute infer defendant's presence illegal still carrying 'the business distiller rectifier without having given bond required law.' Relying holding Tot 319 463, 467, 63 1241, 1245, 87 1519 (1943), there must 'a connection proved ultimate presumed,' upheld basis comprehensive nature 'carrying on' offense common stills are secluded, secret operations. following Term determined, however, possession, custody, control still, narrower offense. 'Presence relevant admissible charge; absent some showing function too tenuous permit guilt—'the one proof other arbitrary . ..' 1519.' 141, 282. 8 Three one-half years after challenge marihuana, unless prove marihuana illegally imported States. concluded view significant possibility domestically grown improbability user domestic origin, meet standards set Tot, Romano. Referring three cases, "irrational' 'arbitrary,' hence unconstitutional, can least said substantial assurance presumed more likely than flow depend.' U.S., 36, S.Ct., 1548. footnote since failed satisfy 'reach presumption passes muster so judged also 'reasonable doubt' charged essential element thereof depends upon use.' Id., n. 64. 9 Finally, decided year Leary, instructing heroin cocaine drugs imported.4 noted reserved doubt controlled likewise found need resolve question. It held regard valid either standard. 416, 652. With cocaine, even 419, 653. 10 teaching foregoing cases altogether clear. To extent connection,' 'more not,' bear ambiguous relationships another, ambiguity traceable large part variations language focus rather differences substance. What has this: (that it, 11 present case we deal deeply rooted law. For centuries courts juries drawn goods. Thayer, writing Preliminary Treatise Evidence (1898), cited descendant 'running through dozen centuries.'5 327. Early American consistently instructions permitting inference,6 appeals numerous occasions approved essentially case.7 This longstanding approval instruction, reflecting accumulated experience, provides strong indication 12 impressive historical basis, itself establish instruction's constitutionality. Common-law like counterparts, process present-day experience.8 permitted guilt property.9 know, innocence. alone sense experience tell us known aware high probability Cf. 417, 652;10 46, 1553. Such clarly enable Since thus conclude requirements process.11 II argues infringes twice rejected argument,12 417—418, 652; 904 (1925), reason re-examine issue length. specifically constitutional right witness stand independent testimony. Introduction testify. 472. III 14 ground insufficient He contends 170813 conclusively refutes argument14 addressed uniformly interpreted require stolen.15 correctly court's fully rights, unnecessary counts.16 16 Affirmed. 17 DOUGLAS, dissenting. Possession traditionally federal system local becomes concern 'mail' implicated. indictment, insofar unlawful concerned, charges items 'stolen mail.' While gone mail, nor As indictment 'three elements' offenses: 19 'FIRST: act acts unlawfully one's contents letter, namely, alleged; 20 'SECOND: That alleged, mail; 21 'THIRD: jury: 22 'If should described while here, drawing those facts accused way defendant's.' Court, Act, originally articles 'knowing same stolen,' 317 (1934 ed.), changed eliminating word 'so' before 'stolen.' H.R.Rep.No.734, 76th Cong., 1st Sess., 1. And Act does ingredient That, beginning, end problem. nexus 'mails' How rationally say 'possession' allows judge mails? 1519, possess firearm shipped interstate foreign commerce, unconstitutional presume commerce.1 decision unanimous. vice burden government use shifts burden. said: '(I)t permissible shift arbitrarily fact, relevance offense, occasion casting obligation exculpation.' 469, 1246. inferences indeed treacherous, men go jail implicates integrity system. re Winship, 397 358, 364, 1068, 1073, 25 368, 'proof every constitute Some wrongdoing basic system, prosecutors easy dispensing requirement effect what today. practical often means great barriers protection procedural contained Bill Rights subtly diluted.2 May Congress constitutionally enact says convict drawn? Thompson City Louisville, 362 199, 80 624, 654, anything, answer negative. unwarranted telling enough laws enacted. seems inescapably plain regime separation powers live. 26 impermissible importation. sheer 'speculation' majority users plant source it. 53, 1557. overall test, said, 'with 27 statistics quantity here amount abroad enters country. There characteristics like. 28 Stolen product burglaries private homes offices. 29 come purses snatched purloined. 30 involve artifices tricks. 31 words, various sources jurisdiction. 32 Checks national banks, agencies, lifted mails sources. 33 But, unlike whatsoever let Without assessing likelihood notice But degree assumed omniscience 'substantial assurance' realities underworld came kind charged. step today will applauded prosecutors, makes easy. designed make job prosecutor difficult. Proof necessary. jury, court, factfinder. These principles dangerous.3 do is, I think, extremely disrespectful controls dispensation justice. 35 BRENNAN, whom MARSHALL joins, 36 six-count elements (1) (2) (3) mails; addition, introduced intended show leaving determine 'knowledge' free my view, violated Fifth Amendment though actual bearing doubt. therefore dissent. 368 (1970), Thus, 653, smuggled "(c)ommon sense' tells traffic inevitably become (Emphasis added.) 'common judgment was, course, indisputable virtually country necessarily smuggled. endorsed Indeed, neither unusual payment goods services. Turner, simply possessor 'inevitably' (1969). 38 short, disbelieved Government's directly 'knowledge.' By authorizing rely exclusively determining 'knowledge,' relieved proving thereby principle Winship witness' findings respect Young Salazar signatures inconclusive. presented inspector's testimony, adopted counsel argument jury. Tr. 107—108. full arising stated: 'Possession 'However, inference. exclusive province warrant permits property. 'The term 'recently' relative term, fixed meaning. Whether case. longer period time theft doubtful possession. 'In considering reminded exercise rights circumstances, testimony accused.' 123—124. knowingly purchased, sold, dispensed, distributed narcotic drug original package tax stamps 4704(a) (1964 ed.). unstamped purchased statute, struck down cocaine. 419—424, (1970). Thayer development presumption: '(T)he Ine (King Wessex, A.D. 688—725) provide that, 'if attached chapman, good witnesses, privy (to theft) thief; pay wite (fine) xxxvi shillings.' serious thing; 'taken mainour,'—a state things formerly might immediate punishment, trial; later, formal accusation; later which, absence contrary verdict, vanishing away recognition (Citations omitted.) 328. See e.g., Wilson 162 613, 895, 40 1090 (1896); Commonwealth Millard, Mass. (1804); Knickerbocker People, 43 N.Y. 177 (1870); State Raymond, 46 Conn. 345 (1878); Cook State, 84 Tenn. 461, S.W. 254 (1886). E.g., Russo, 413 432 (CA2 1969); Smith, 446 200 (CA4 1971); Winbush, 428 357 (CA6), cert. denied, 400 918, 91 179, 157 Hood, 422 737 (CA7), 820, 38, 48 Dilella, 354 584 (CA7 1965). reasoning statutory-inference applicable analysis 70, 759, Rules Courts Magistrates (proposed Nov. 1972), Urle 303(a), 56 F.R.D. 212. fewer problems. invoked discretion judge. statutes creating preserve charging 406 646 68—70, 758, inherent Of explain innocence bar weigh 'satisfactory.' Supra, 840, 3. bound accept believe particular correctness crime, remains Government. "Common smuggled, practice studied ignorance entitled.' true going forward defendant. proves nothing more, introduces freely shifted 44—45, 1552, held, inferred, Where certainly (in knowledge) order (possession property). decide judge-formulated less antiquity authority properly emphasized instruction. 'be fairly understood comment failure testify.' 70—71, 759. 'Whoever ., (shall fined imprisoned both).' Prior 1939 ed.) (emphasis added). See, Brandenburg 78 811 (CA3 1935). eliminated preceding H.R.Rep. 734, (1939), explains change: reported bill amends existing sustain committee feel requiring mails.' S.Rep. 864, Sess. (1939). Hines, 256 561 1958); 343 539 (CA5), 861, 122, 99 Gardner, 454 534 (CA9), 867, 164, 116 (1972); Schultz, 462 622 (CA9 1972). affirmance moot issues raises pertaining remaining Benton Maryland, 784, 2056, 707 (1969), decline discretionary matter reach issues. 138, 280, 1943, passage amendment Had inconceivable change Act. Black previously voiced concern. 425, 656, (dissenting opinion); 72, 74, 760, 761, opinions). Christoffel 338 84, 89, 1447, 1450, 1826, 'all shall guiding rule guilt. cogently argued place framework. Stan.L.Rev. 341 indubitably me, suspicion

Category: 3