Document: 339 U.S. 9 70 S.Ct. 457 94 L.Ed. 604 SOLESBEEv.BALKCOM, Warden of the State Penitentiary, Tattnall, Georgia. No. 77. Argued and Submitted Nov. 15, 1949. Decided Feb. 20, 1950. Rehearing Denied March 27, See 926, 618. Mr. Benjamin E. Pierce, Augusta, Ga., for appellant. Eugene Cook, Atlanta, appellee. Justice BLACK delivered opinion Court. 1 Petitioner was convicted murder in a Georgia state court. His sentence death by electrocution. Subsequently he asked Governor to postpone execution on ground that after conviction had become insane. Acting under authority granted § 27-2602 Code1 appointed three physicians who examined petitioner declared him sane. then filed this habeas corpus proceeding again alleging his insanity. He contended due process clause Fourteenth Amendment required claim insanity be originally determined judicial or administrative tribunal notice hearings which could represented counsel, cross-examine witnesses offer evidence. further if its findings must subject review. The trial court sustained constitutional validity 27-2602, holding determination petitioner's sanity supported report met standards process. Supreme Court affirmed, 205 Ga. 122, 52 S.E.2d 433, 436. questions being substantial, see Phyle v. Duffy, 334 431, 439, 68 1131, 1134, 92 1494, case is here appeal 28 U.S.C. 1257(2), U.S.C.A. 1257(2). 2 In affirming, held person legally sentenced no statutory right judicially conducted supervised 'inquisition trial' question subsequent sentence.2 It viewed procedure as motivated solely sense 'public propriety decency'—an 'act grace' 'bestowed withheld at will' therefore not requirements hearing. cited authority, among others, our Nobles Georgia, 168 398, 18 87, 42 515. Compare Burns United States, 287 216, 223, 53 154, 156, 77 266. 3 accordance with established policy we shall go beyond issues necessarily raised record. At outset lay aside contention an insane type 'cruel unusual punishment' forbidden Amendment. Francis Resweber, 329 459, 67 374, 91 422. For controlling statutes neither approve practice executing persons, nor about executed such premise. suggested reasoning requires us pass upon statute though it designed execute persons while But measure some possible future application. Our limited whether method applied determine already defendant offends 4 Postponement because bears close affinity crime but rather reprieves sentences general. power reprieve has usually sprung from same source pardon. Power executive clemency country undoubtedly derived existed England. Such traditionally rested governors President, although often delegated agencies pardon parole boards. Seldom, ever, been subjected review courts. Ex parte 242 42, 37 72, 74, 61 129, L.R.A.1917E, 1178, Ann.Cas.1917B, 355, cases collected Note, 38 L.R.A. 577, 587. 5 We are unable say deem 'apt special tribunal'3 so closely related powers beginning have entrusted governors. And governor aid specially trained appraising elusive deceptive symptoms true might make errors judgment. search truth field always beset difficulties may beget error. Even wrong. 6 Recently pointed out necessary inherent differences between procedures post-conviction sentencing. Williams People New York, 337 241, 69 1079. emphasized certain safeguards applicable This principle applies even more forcefully effort transplant every safeguard conviction. As case, supra, require time would possibility carrying depend 'fecundity making suggestion insanity.' pages 405—406, 89—90, also supra. To protect itself society try, convict, sentences. legal system demands governmental duty performed scrupulous fairness accused. cannot leave person's solemn responsibility state's highest invoke most skillful class experts crucial involved. 7 leaves do provisions adversary hearing can present friends, attorneys, person, privilege cross-examining offering Whether declined hear any statements behalf, record does show. suppose all governors, like judges, welcome information where human lives their decision. 8 Both stand universal common-law sentence, charged vested broad discretion deciding evidence heard. nonreviewable appellate courts.4 heart doctrine conscience sound wisdom particular sentence. trust thus reposed judges should denied saying last word spells life death. There indication either acted application violated humanitarian against hold denial law. Affirmed. 10 DOUGLAS took part consideration decision case. 11 FRANKFURTER, dissenting. 12 history murder, onset awaiting rare phenomenon. problems supervening raises happily involve explorations pathological processes give rise conflict socalled medical M'Naghten's Case, Cl. & F. 200 (1843); Glueck, Mental Disorder Criminal Law passim (1925); Minutes Evidence before 1949 Royal Commission Capital Punishment. now presents familiar issue placed setting 13 this: without offending Due Process Clause put one whose behalf claimed became execution, opportunity rejected basis ex inquiry State? very recently, circumstances matter ripe 1494. On met. Unlike situation urged judgment open given when Duffy went back California 34 Cal.2d 144, 208 P.2d 668. avoid electrocution makes substantial address mind Governor, those advise him, order establish fact Phyle's recognized 'the gravity clause.' page Apparently June, 1948 today seems dispelled. These grave almost summarily answered. weightiness argument presented bar none made slight brief hardly discusses problems. 14 immediate depends view takes If infliction persists, course need into existence chooses entirely own terms. limit State's assert supremacy prohibit violation State. 15 easy, quick way puts problem side us. determining what procedural provide, difference world States Constitution places substantive restriction take man. merely benevolent withholding kill, exercise benevolence sees fit. precluded man temporarily permanently insane, grace taken. taking Constitution, within how will ascertain sanity. afford rudimentary establishing fact. denies them she transgresses substance limits her. 16 Does insane? settled embodies rights based moral principles deeply embedded traditions feelings people deemed fundamental civilized conceived whole history. comports deepest notions fair just. beliefs less likely they explicitly stated. respect essence Clause. enforcing translate personal views limitations. applying large, untechnical concept 'due process,' enforces permanent pervasive there compelling kind relevant judgments social institutions. 17 That historic heritage kill gainsaid. limitation law centuries, during periods English were barbarous men recoiled brutal action than think time. 'a historical product,' Jackman Rosenbaum Co., 260 22, 31, 43 9, 107, expansion purposes find carries impressive credentials forbidding death: 'It provided said Act 33 H. 8. attainted treason mad, notwithstanding executed; cruell inhumane lived long, repealed, point common law, intendment offender example, ut poena ad paucos, metus omnes perveniat, said: mad executed, miserable spectacle, both extreame inhumanity cruelty, example others.' Coke, Third Institutes (1644). 19 'And agreed Day, committed capital Offence, Non Compos Conviction, arraigned; executed.' Hawkins, Pleas Crown (1716). 20 '* * nothing Law, Person falls Crime suppos'd committed, try'd it; fall Judgment, executed: tho I reason Point maintain it, is, End Punishment striking Terror Madman effect; true, living equal, Senses. this, non sana Memoria, Lunatick Lunacy, God (for call'd, means humane, violent, hard Imprisonment, terror Death, natural, Sickness) disabled just Defence, Circumstances lying private Knowledg, prove Innocency, advantage, known Persons Defence. 21 'The King otherwise benefited destruction Subjects, Example deters others committing Crimes; many Examples of, besides whom misfortunes Madness fall, inconsistent humanity them; Religion, Christian Charity send great Offender quick, stil'd, another World, capacity fit himself it. whatever plain *.' Remarks Tryal Charles Bateman Sir John Hawles, Solicitor-General reign William III, State-Tryals 651, 652—53 (1719). 22 'If memory commits offense, arraignment becomes absolutely ought arraigned phrenzy, remitted prison until incapacity removed; advisedly plead indictment. plea, trial, sane memory, tried; or, receive judgment; spared; allege somewhat stay execution.' Hale, History 34-35 (1736).1 23 'Another cause regular compos judgment, ordered execution: 'furiosus solo furore punitur,' knows offered reason, senses, stayed these respective proceedings.' Bl. Comm. 388-89 (1769). 24 However quaint ancient authorities ears, Twentieth Century far progressed outmode reasoning. humane Englishmen centuries preceded Republic.2 practical considerations Hawles Hale Hawkins Blackstone writings nurtured founders Republic. gone still himself? Is convicted? event 'were somewhat' save doom. idle fancy not, becoming compos, 'allege free him. life, minute applications success amply attest.3 25 short American revealed unbroken command preceding separation Colonies. sight, were, basic disposition namely, Union supports notion executed. claims rooted power, stands guard enforce 26 Unless fully implications duly respected, avoided. dealing Crown's prerogative mercy continued through pardoning grace. Grossman, 267 45 332, 527, A.L.R. 131. Nor range penal laws flexible instead fixed penalties. established, to-wit, insanity, unto other restrictions liberty property. say: 'I choose insane.' says State: 'Thou shalt not.' 27 come deny agency government facts which, executioner's hand. manner dealt furnishes reflex, Clause, underlying treatment 29 Six longer penalty. (See Appendix, Part A.) remaining 42: 30 I. penalty suspended 31 (a) Of these, provide (5 law) judicial. (Part B.) 32 (b) ultimate snaity judge jury hearing, initiation designated police official. (1) official's initiate C-I.) (2) legislation adjudication defining C-II.) (c) body laymen. 35 appears D-I.) 36 appear inquiry. D-II.) (3) provision indicating nature D-III.) II. suspension Governor. E.) 39 III. available decisions clear classification. strong indications sentence,4 insufficient material inference, material. F.) 40 start single gives having uprooted too brings mode lawful killing State, person. Nine Fourteen initiating inquiry, various alternatives jury, appropriate ten advisors separate board. only six including behind closed doors submission prerequisite 41 signifies continuity repulsion vindication concern turns ascertainment called fact, mental sciences best hazardous guess however conscientious. least minimum assuring itself. assurance life-and-death truly informed ingredient process, allowed substantiate rejected. requirement enforced mere interests property e.g., Pennoyer Neff, 95 714, 565; Priest Board Trustees Las Vegas, 232 604, 443, 58 751. concerned losses irremediable irretrievable claims. If, day, saves sent jail sixty days charge contempt tried secret, re Oliver, 333 257, 499, 682, vindicate self-respect sending show condition bars inform tribunal—be board judge—that decide death, forfeit except land. 'is entitled relatives counsel present, offense charged' convicted, 272, 507, someone speak modern penological thought, translated legislation, vests imposing needs repeated, discretion. Not 'has roots heritage' deep convict 266, 504, 682. rule protected aspects victim next kin 44 Since guilt consequences, proceeding. Ng Fung Ho White, 259 276, 284-285, 492, 495, 66 938. open; camera. precisely camera, relation determination. tentative dubious knowledge diseases strife schools regard them, surely operates unfairly determinations hangs balance. unfair treacherous uncertainties psychiatric impugn good faith Governors boards excluding sought putative conclusion reached proof reliability. largely reached. A want conflicting views, equally persuasive, regarding man's Claims obviously frivolous heard, listen raise question. baseless. 46 groundless fear assume obstruct rigorous administration criminal justice allow informal expeditious claim. needed unreasonably delay unless shoud delayed. risk undue comparable grim hurried, one-sided, untested answers yet wrapped confusion dependent elucidation one-sided partisanship. 47 my APPENDIX TO OPINION OF J. 48 concerning supervenes sentence.1 49 A. arise penalty:2 50 Me.Rev.Stat. c. 117, (1944). 51 Mich.Comp.Laws, 750.316 (1948). Minn.Stat. 619.07 (Henderson 1945), M.S.A. 619.07. (4) N.D.Rev.Code, 12-2713 (1943).3 54 (5) R.I.Gen.Laws, 606, (1938).3 55 (6) Wis.Stat. 340.02 (1947). 56 B. suspending judge:4 Statutory Procedure: 57 (7) Ala.Code Ann. tit. 427 (1940). (8) Colo.Stat.Ann. 48, §§ 6, (1935). Bulger People, Colo. 187, 156 P. 800. 59 (9) Ill.Rev.Stat. 38, 593—594 (1949). Geary, 298 Ill. 236, 131 N.E. 652; Preston, 345 11, 177 761. 60 (10) La.Code Crim.Law Proc.Ann.Art. (1943). Allen, 204 La. 513, So.2d 870; Tul.L.Rev. 497; Gunter, 694, 305; Hebert, 187 318, 174 So. 369; La.Laws 1918, 261, p. 483. (11) N.J.Stat.Ann. 2:193—12 (1939) connection Lang, N.J.L. 207, 71 47; Herron, 315, 72 133; Id., 79 67, 73 599. Common procedure: 62 (12) North Carolina. Vann, 84 N.C. 722, 724; Godwin, 216 49, 347; Sullivan, 229 251, 458. N.C.Gen.Stat.Ann. 122-84, 122-85 (Supp.1949). 63 (13) South Bethune, 88 S.C. 401, S.E. 29. S.C.Code 6239 (1942). 64 (14) Tennessee. Jordan 124 Tenn. 81, 90—91, 135 S.W. 327, 329—330, L.R.A.,N.S., 1115; Bonds 143, Am.Dec. 795. Tenn.Code 4476, 4502 (Williams 1934). 65 (15) Washington. Nordstrom, Wash. 403, 248, 584; Grossi Long, 136 133, 238 983; rel. Alfani Superior Court, 139 125, 245 929, 801; Davis, Wash.2d 696, 717, 108 641, 652—651. C. official:5 Official's refusal review: (16) Ark.Stat.Ann. 41-109, 43-2622 Howell Kincannon, 181 Ark. 58, S.W.2d 953; Todhunter, 250, 21; Shank 189 881, 75 382. (17) Cal.Pen.Code, 1367, 3701—3703 undefined adjudication: (18) Idaho Code 19-2709 19-2712, 19-3301 (19) Ky.Rev.Stat. 431.240 Ky.Codes, Crim.Prac. 295—296 (1948); Barrett Commonwealth, 202 Ky. 153, 25; Stucker 261 618, 280; Murrell 291 65, 163 1. (20) Mo.Rev.Stat.Ann. 4192—4194 (1939). 74 (21) Mont.Rev.Codes 94-8009 94-8012 (22) Nev.Comp.Laws 11192.01 11192.06 (Supp.1945). 76 (23) N.M.Stat.Ann. 42-1404 42-1407 (1941). (24) Ohio Gen.Code 13456-8, 13456-9 78 (25) Okl.Stat.Ann. 1005—1008 (1937). Bingham 82 Okl.Crim. 305, 169 311. (26) Pa.Stat.Ann. 50, (Supp.1948). Commonwealth Barnes, 280 Pa. 351, 636 (whether govern clear). cf. McGinnis, Pa.Sup., Wkly. Notes Cas. 221. 80 (27) Tex.Stat., Crim.Proc. arts. 921—927 (1948), Vernon's Ann.C.C.P. 921—927. Dotson 149 Tex.Crim.R. 434, 195 372. initiated affidavits two physicians. Cf. Millikin, Tex.Crim. 121, 299 433; Millikin Jeffrey, 117 Tex. 134, 393 (similar earlier statute). 81 (28) Utah 105—37—9 105—37—12 Johnson Alexander, 87 376, 408; Green, 491, 1324. (29) Wyo.Comp.Stat.Ann. 10-1701, 10-1702 (1945). 83 explicit finality None. 85 D. laymen official: 86 Proceeding heard: (30) Iowa Code, 792.5 792.7 (1946), I.C.A. parte: (31) Conn.Gen.Stat. 8817 89 (32) Kan.Gen.Stat.Ann. 62-2406 90 (33) Neb.Rev.Stat. 29-2509 Grammer, 104 Neb. 744, 178 N.W. 624. affords heard uncertain: (34) Ariz.Code 44-2307, 44-2309 93 (35) Fla.Stat. 922.07 (1941), F.S.A. (36) Miss.Code 2558 Governor: 96 (37) Ga.Code 27-2601, (1936), Solesbee Balkcom, 433. 97 (38) Indiana. Diamond Ind. 285, 144 466 (only remedy Governor). 98 (39) Mass.Gen.Laws, 279, (1932), Juggins Executive Council, 257 Mass. 386, 154 advice consent Council). 99 classification: 100 (40) Delaware. Del.Rev.Code 3083 (1935) (insanity cases); id. 3084 serving imprisonment sentence). 101 (41) Maryland. Md.Ann.Code Gen.Laws art. 798; 59, 102 (42) Hampshire. 103 (43) N.Y.Crim.Code, 495-a. Rep.Atty.Gen.N.Y. 294, 297 (1914), Skwirsky, 213 N.Y. 151, 153—154, 107 47—48. (44) Oregon. Or.Comp.Laws 26-930, 26-931 (1940) trial). 105 (45) Dakota. S.D.Code 34.2001 (a 'be tried, adjudged punishment, punished public insane'); 34.2002 34.2004 106 (46) Vermont. (47) Virginia. Va.Code 19-208, 37-93 (1950) sentence); 19-209 (48) West W.Va.Code 6198 (1949) 'Disposition convicts. Upon satisfactory conviction, may, discretion, expert choose; result investigation; Milledgeville Hospital restored, force. *' section 1074, P.C., Acts 1903, 'No inquisition sanity.' 1073, 409, 88, 91, Notes, Ann.Cas.1916E 424 et seq.; 801 577 seq. first publication Hale's manuscript left 1676. Holdsworth, 574, 589—90 (1924). Report Committee Insanity Crime, Cmd. 2005, pp. 17, (1923). Insane tried. Youtsey Cir., 937; Forthoffer Swope, F.2d 707. After test prisoner 'from defects faculties, sufficient intelligence understand proceedings for, purpose impending fate awaits understanding know exist punishment unjust unlawful, requisite convey attorneys court.' Smith, N.M. 176 819, 823, 83. 870. warning meaning attributed Appendix benefit guiding that, throw light classification pronouncements holdings. ruling business. added latest materials Library guarantee later local materials. degree murder. Gru nhut, Penal Reform providing questions: ben prima facie showing warrant proceeding; finder note Most Parts C D official responsible act 'good reason,' ground, believing thse provides 'may' reason' exists, thereby raising 'may,' considering function, 'must' legislative English. 21.

Category: 3