Document: 385 U.S. 363 87 S.Ct. 468 17 L.Ed.2d 420 Lee E. A. PARKER, Petitioner,v.Clarence T. GLADDEN, Warden of the Oregon State Penitentiary. No. 81. Argued Nov. 9, 1966. Decided Dec. 12, John H. Schafer, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. David Blunt, The Dalles, Or., respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner, after his conviction second degree murder, v. Parker, 235 Or. 366, 384 P.2d 986, filed a petition post-conviction relief, Or.Rev.Stat. § 138.550. At hearing on trial court found that bailiff assigned to shepherd sequestered jury, which sat eight days, stated one jurors in presence others, while jury was out walking public sidewalk: 'Oh wicked fellow (petitioner), he is guilty';1 and another occasion said juror under similar circumstances, 'If there anything wrong (in finding petitioner guilty) Supreme Court will correct it.'2 Both statements were overheard by at least regular or an alternate. 'that unauthorized communication prejudicial such conduct materially affected rights (petitioner).' reversed, 'the bailiff's misconduct did not deprive (petitioner) constitutionally trial.' 407 246. We granted certiorari, 904, 86 1345, 16 357. federal question decided Oregon's highest is, course, subject final determination this we have concluded judgment must be reversed. 2 believe are controlled command Sixth Amendment, made applicable States through Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment. It guarantees accused shall enjoy right * trial, impartial (and) confronted with witnesses against him *.' As Turner Louisiana, 379 466, 472—473, 85 546, 550, 13 424 (1965), 'evidence developed' defendant come from witness stand courtroom where full judicial protection defendant's confrontation, cross-examination, counsel.' Here dispute neither as what bailiff, officer State, nor when it subjected cross-examination other safeguards guaranteed Rather, expressions 'private talk,' tending reach 'outside influence.' Patterson People Colorado, 205 454, 462, 27 556, 558, 51 L.Ed. 879 (1907). followed 'undeviating rule,' Sheppard Maxwell, 333, 351, 1507, 1516, 600 (1966), confrontation among fundamental requirements fair trial. Kirby United States, 174 47, 55, 56, 19 574, 577, 43 890 (1899); In re Oliver, 333 257, 273, 68 499, 507, 92 682 (1948); Pointer Texas, 380 400, 1065, 923 (1965). 3 suggests no prejudice shown harm could resulted because 10 members testified they had heard law permits verdict guilty affirmative votes. This overlooks fact official character bailiff—as well State—beyond carries great weight been shepherding days nights. Moreover, deliberated 26 hours, indicating difference them guilt Finally, one3 she prejudiced statements, supports court's defendant.' upset court. Aside this, 'involves probability result deemed inherently lacking due process,' Estes 381 532, 542—543, 1628, 1633, 14 543 supra, 'it would blinking reality recognize extreme inherent' reached three alternate member. U.S., 473, S.Ct., 550. says bailiff. This, however, ignores testimony unidentifed juror, which, including Mrs. Inwards Drake, makes three. any event, entitled tried 9 even 10, unprejudiced jurors. See Murray, 164 La. 883, 888, 114 So. 721, 723. 4 Reversed. 5 Mr. Justice HARLAN, dissenting. 6 By setting forth background proceeding has put seriously focus constitutional issue involved case. 7 Parker convicted murder May 19, 1961, sentenced life imprisonment. On September 7, addressed letter several protesting innocence, condemning attorneys incompetence, intimating coerced into lying, chiding being duped guilty. After affirmance 15, 1963 some two years verdict—Parker again set take case jury. He furnished wife tape recording propounded series questions designed uncover possible improprieties jury's deliberations. long time told their discussion heated. Although unaware irregularities commenced 'shooting dark.' (Tr., p. 16.) then acquired list discovered those who most sympathetic her husband.1 She invited home listen discuss An attorney retained prepare affidavits detailing allegations before us institute postconviction proceeding. apparently Elizabethan-tongued but, contrary Court's assertion, these only nature effect.2 find proceedings fundamentally unfair. 8 finds remarks violation Amendment's requirement. I 'a 'implicit concept ordered liberty," 408, 1070, (concurring opinion Harlan, J.), cannot accede view Amendment directly Fourteenth. problem here asserted, know held absolutely insulated all merits process risk declaration new Irvin Dowd, 366 U.S 717, 81 1639, 751. Even acted its supervisory capacity refused hold contact outside information always cause overthrowing verdict, wisely preferring allow 'each (to) turn special facts.' Marshall 360 310, 312, 79 1171, 1173, 1250. notes state officer, but does explain why instance make more 'witness' than person able communicate Thus, though unintentionally, leaves open possibility automatically requiring mistrial grounds whenever exposed potentially expression opinion. Considering case, would, doctrine fairness implicit think different follows. Much reliance placed upon 424. But faced situation allowed deputy sheriffs key 'continuous intimate association' 'blinking inherent this' situation. There too ' procedure employed State' involving 'such result' 'inherently process.' 543. adopted faulted seems clear me rule Stroble California, 343 181, 72 599, 96 872, should apply substantial showing can found. basis occurrences seem inconsequential light eight-day twenty-six-hour deliberation. And my feeling confirmed extremely trivial evidence amounting assertion obviously highly emotional 'guilt-ridden' might influenced without realizing it.3 '(I)t impossible standard require tribunal (the jury) laboratory, completely sterilized freed external factors.' Rideau 373 723, 733, 83 1417, 1423, 663 (Clark, J., dissenting). 11 potentialities today's decision may go far beyond what, am sure, intends. Certainly wish encourage felons 'intimidate, beset harass,' Stein New York, 346 156, 178, 73 1077, 1089, 97 1522, discharged effort establish Our courts alert protect sanctity process. McDonald Pless, 238 264, 35 783, 59 1300; see Castaldi 251 F.Supp. 681. allowing overturn incidents otherwise flawless proceeding, encourages others follow example pursuing thought commit habeas corpus interrogate mere allegation remark ears members. Remmer 347 227, 74 450, 98 654. To subscribe. 12 correctly assessed us, affirm judgment. statement Gattman Inwards. unidentified Drake. recalled response 'all me. didn't realize time.' record shows first called number one, Inwards, obtained names longest. also informed Gattman, Parker's cause. purported Kristich, 226 240, 359 1106, communicated point presumed. Thus leged plaintiff's attention, Court, own motion, trial,' deserved nature. reversed erroneously applied new-trial error magnitude serve overthrow verdict. specific distinguishing 424, noted 'difference out-of-courtroom influence so lead conclusion 246, 249. recall unconsciously influenced, denied examined. further admitted do short committing perjury it. stated, although gone judge never mentioned him. specifying 'must' limited herself declaring connection pressure during deliberations thus stating all' influenced.

Category: 0