Document: 392 U.S. 293 88 S.Ct. 1921 20 L.Ed.2d 1100 Carl Houston ROBERTSv.Lake E. RUSSELL. No. 920, Misc. June 10, 1968. Rehearing Denied Oct. 14, See 89 73. George F. McCanless, Atty. Gen. of Tennessee, and Paul Jennings, Asst. Gen., for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 In Bruton v. United States, 391 123, 1620, 476, decided May 20, 1968, we overruled Delli Paoli 352 232, 77 294, 278 held that, despite instructions to the jury disregard implicating statements in determining codefendant's guilt or innocence, admission at a joint trial defendant's extrajudicial confession codefendant violated right cross-examination secured by Confrontation Clause Sixth Amendment. This case presents question whether is be applied retroactively. We hold that it is. 2 The facts parallel Bruton. petitioner was convicted armed robbery with one Rappe Davidson County, Tennessee. A police officer testified orally confessed him committed crime. judge instructed Rappe's admissible against her but were not considered petitioner's innocence. Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed conviction. Petitioner filed proceeding federal habeas corpus States District Middle That court relied on denied relief. Appeals Circuit affirmed. 3 Although involved prosecution this state prosecution, Amendment made applicable Fourteenth Pointer State Texas, 380 400, 85 1065, 13 923; Douglas Alabama, 415, 1074, 934. 4 'We have * retroactively rules criminal procedure fashioned correct serious flaws fact-finding process trial.' Stovall Denno, 388 293, 298, 87 1967, 1970, 18 1199. Jackson 378 368, 84 1774, 12 908; Gideon Wainwright, 372 335, 83 792, 9 799; Reck Pate, 367 433, 81 1541, 6 948; Linkletter Walker, 381 618, 639, 1731, 1743, 14 601; n. Johnson New Jersey, 384 719, 727—728, 86 1772, 1777—1778, 16 882; cf. Brookhart Janis, 1, 1245, 314. Despite cautionary instruction, which implicates results such 'serious flaw.' retroactivity holding therefore required; error 'went basis fair hearing because procedural apparatus never assured (petitioner) determination' his supra, 20. As said Bruton: 5 '(T)here are some contexts risk will not, cannot, follow so great, consequences failure vital defendant, practical human limitations system cannot ignored. Such context presented here, where powerfully incriminating deliberately spread before U.S., 135—136, S.Ct., 1627. Due regard countervailing considerations—reliance old standard impact upon administration justice, 1970—does counsel element reliance persuasive, has been under attack from its inception many courts fact rejected it. 128—135, 1623, nn. 4, 8, 10. And even if may significant, constitutional issue innocence reliably determined. 7 motion leave proceed forma pauperis petition writ certiorari granted. judgment vacated remanded further consideration light supra. 8 It ordered. Judgment Court. 10 Mr. Justice BLACK concurs Court's as reasons given dissent 640, opinion today. 11 HARLAN WHITE stated WHITE'S dissenting 138, 1629 (1968).

Category: 0