Document: 335 U.S. 252 68 S.Ct. 1415 92 L.Ed. 1935 TAYLORv.STATE OF ALABAMA. No. 721. Argued April 30, May 3, 1948. Decided June 21, [Syllabus from pages 252-254 intentionally omitted] Messrs. Nesbitt Elmore, of Montgomery, Ala., and Thurgood Marshall, New York City, for petitioner. Mr. Bernard F. Sykes, respondent. Justice BURTON delivered the opinion Court. 1 The question in this case is whether State Alabama deprived petitioner due process law under Fourteenth Amendment1 to Constitution United States when Supreme Court that denied him permission file a petition writ error coram nobis Circuit Mobile County, Alabama. We hold it did not. also procedure, whereby one its trial courts, by nobis, may set aside own judgment criminal because an fact not apparent on common record, procedure long recognized constitutes Amendment. further accordance with long-established practice Amendment requiring be secured before filing such court Alabama, if appears court's already has been affirmed 2 October 25, 1946, petitioner, Samuel Taylor, Negro, residing Prichard, then 19 years old, was indicted rape. act which he attack made 12, white girl 14 old. 26, Henri M. Aldridge, County Bar, appointed represent However, 28, counsel's motion, order and, throughout trial, represented evidently as counsel petitioner's choice or his family. December motion Court, same prepare prosecute appeal He thus at least until date 24, 1947, clear rendered adequate competent service.2 3 took place November 19, 1946. After full hearing take stand, judge submitted jury four alternative forms verdicts: 'guilty rape charged indictment, find shall suffer death electrocution'; rape, imprisoned penitentiary for—' ('whatever you should determine, less than ten up life'); carnal knowledge, for—years' two nor more ten'), 'not guilty.' returned verdict first form sentenced electrocuted January 9, Kilby Prison, No new but notice entered sentence suspended pending appeal. 4 On fully briefed argued, unanimously affirmed. Taylor v. State, 249 Ala. 130, 30 So.2d 256. From subsequent brief apply rehearing, later clemency Governor, granted reprive execution September 1947. 5 18, counsel, instituted present proceeding Montgomery. This numbered First Division 308 entitled 'Ex Parte In Re 279 Appellant Appellee.' 667, 32 659. It initiated granting right nobis. sworn supported affidavits three men who had Prichard jail 29—July these affidavit executed September, presented time charge several confessions, identification prosecutrix demonstration locations part crime, all July induced physical violence administered threats prior date. Throughout uncontradicted testimony given repeatedly volunteered confessions disclosures 'to get off chest.' attitude reinforced ready complete many details otherwise unavailable. each instance were consistent other evidence demonstrative unfailing truthfulness statements 3. proceeding, any point self-contradictory conflict evidence. His petition, hand, direct Mayor others, testified now alleges when, apart 'was asked said attorney * mistreated beaten fashion enforcement officers connection giving confession replied negative, being uneducated ignorant aforesaid, fearful reprisals police officers.' I does appear contrary even during affirmance appeal, although out custody aware diligence without success, sought uncover possible coercion worthy that, admission statement nature confession, diligently inquire into voluntariness, never succeeded bringing involuntary character. expressly found admissible. failure change original would course record 6 suspended. filed dismiss petition. called attention recently reviewed contradictory position taken 29, issue argued accompanied eight photographs 5:37 p.m., Seven nude immediately after day following dates 29 2, inclusive, severe beatings him.3 13, vote six one, Ex parte rehearing. March 1948, certiorari here. Because important relation Amendment, especially capital cases, we certiorari. 333 866, 787. 7 secure review does. enable correct have based upon law.4 survives varying state federal purpose served.5 held came us Florida, 1942, conformed Hysler 315 411, 62 688, 86 932.6 since decision, 1943, Johnson Williams, 244 391, 13 683, followed Florida precedents there no controversy e re conformity those precedents.7 8 As distinguished traditional enabling superior committed court, brings directly court. bound mandate Under circumstances, appropriate require secure, where seeks setting additional step included favorably considered supra. 9 precisely prsent proceeding. refusal grant review. both ancient recent violate required 10 come merits particular case. denial here amounted itself circumstances however, mandatory permission. faced event review, de novo, request limited determination whether, action denying merely life liberty law. 11 passing accept face value allegations though demurrer. That decide only true, meritorious ground previous judgment, supervisory capacity over law, determine reasonableness probability improbability their truth. standard guide stated 394, 686, follows: 12 'We recognize (Hysler 146 Fla. 593, 628), available remedy followed. See 24 C.J.S., Criminal Law, § 1606. rule think just proper, adopted, calls conviction affirmed, leave circuit obtained judgment. Such application make showing substantiality claim satisfaction A mere naked allegation constitutional invaded will suffice. disclosure specific facts relied upon, conclusions effect facts. proof must 'ascertain settled principles perti ning alleged afford prima facie lower nobis.' And exercise our discretion matters character, look existence truth thereof. 691, 932, 'each guilt determined ordinary processes challenge essential justice instance, last bench judges rather jury,' outlined above, adopted meets requirements clause Constitution.' (Italics supplied.) remains test There presumption validity attached factual basis about 18 months ago trial. seven very reached conclusion, 'the averments (new) are unreasonable contained therein, proposed meritorious.' supra, 670, 671, page 661. reviewing emphasize considerations: 15 Like every case, serious moment. courts here, consideration material Both opinions handed down disclose appreciation members obligations nation. 16 Since sentenced, pay penalty prescribed crime convicted, fullest might authorities substantial argument behalf. responsibilities 17 mindful rights Federal responsibility resting cases so far defendant concerned, feel like society laws state.' 669, 660. If supporting stood alone accepted materially different what is. read affidavits, them, close entire They tested context reasonableness, truth, effectiveness they relationship general all. inherent elements strength weakness bearing credibility give consideration. contrast situation contains false (except reference Sergeant Wilkes shows plainly erroneous). bases claims nt consists applied times covered All addition evidence, known claimed concealed counsel. newly disclosed discovered eyes well affected fact. deny acts based. sufficient exclusion, certain conduct used against 20 charges state's use knew 21 More lack compelling force probable falsity allegations: 22 1. himself persons, whom associate arrested detained police, some connected One affiants serving ten-year robbery Prison. With exception none associates seen heard administered. extreme terms marks beatings, actually occurred, probably evident whereas condition appearance photographs, lend support affidavits. 23 2. C. D. perjuring 'by falsely testifying Petitioner subjected mistreatment making confession.' Wilkes, gave subject. At duty prosecutrix, talked p.m. manner a.m. Nothing cross-examination subject demonstrates perjury foundation. either witness, mental coercion, inducement promise volunteered, detailed repeated conduct, victim designation, sketch premises, localities occurrences. Although alert diligent endeavored occasion voluntariness succeed convincing them excluded having involuntarily made. efforts resulted nothing establishing witnesses little knowledge presence absence extended periods thereto. said: 'The voluntary character duly treated former Nor contain slightest indication defendant, Negro twenty age, subnomal.' 25 4. witness body G. Porter, member much brought cell answer opportunity initial signs mistreated. afternoon described disclosing 'no indications forth petition.' 26 5. Still striking These disarming self-confirmatory suggest record. When full, free manner, content affirmative carry obvious earmarks wished tell 'all it' 'get Shortly thereafter, told story others. still others later. while riding car scene crime. written assistant county solicitor, signed supplemented drew himself. introduced solicitor behalf Later day, form. personally identified she him. Mayor, unequivocally coerced. Excerpts margin retold trial.8 27 6. fear reprisals. defend privately retained handle misled attorney, lacked confidence him, reason attorney's thoroughly nothing, show false. police. sent Prison 200 miles away. concluded: 28 conducted care. indicate prejudice, single untoward incident recorded. asking entirely too believe secrecy consultation able say substance base objection solely generated treatment accorded nearly previous.' appeared For reasons, conclude not, arbitrary amount deprivation 31 Cor t acting within authority trials 'Upon Accordingly, 33 Affirmed. 34 BLACK decision 35 FRANKFURTER, concuring. 36 dissenting appeals revision convictions courts. consider independently, revisory appellate tribunal power do so, coerced confession. hardly gather best safeguards entitled; defended concededly exerted professional skill client; guided proceedings competence scrupulosity; careful resulting highest 37 Due Process Clause protection. furnish corrective convicted person, outlined, establish procured offend fundamental conceptions lie civil political institutions.' Mooney Holohan, 294 103, 110, 55 340, 342, 79 791, 98 A.L.R. 406. reinsurance punished violation basic notions another jury. 'Each decided jury.' 417, 932. 38 cannot denied, provides process. chose finally could disregardful Not, view fairness reasonably rejected claim—made belatedly regard human probabilities situation. could, matter process, foundation proceedings, conviction, undermined infraction Constitution, disregard conscientious concluded, totality strong reject it. reaching conclusion judge, ability defed ant represented, behavior accused light weight 39 me, essence sentence: 659, deem reasoning unsustainable reason, am it, therefore agree Court's opinion. 40 But carries me sustaining Judicial Code bring independent habeas corpus District States.1 41 MURPHY, dissenting. 42 fixed guaranteed valid whole Lee Mississippi, 332 742, 745, 300, 301. Wherever shown product reasoned choice, void. void true sustain conviction. 43 principle reflects abhorrence man, innocent guilty, belief torture coerce individual confessing endanger liberties persons History once tyrannical methods permitted man invariably Brutality knows distinction between guilty. most inquisitorial friendless, ignorant, poor despised. Chambers 309 227, 237, 238, 60 472, 477, 478, 84 716. To guard evil, therefore, requires whenever nature. 44 problem guilty death, coercive methods. refused allow theory unreasonable. affirming refusal, relies considerations irrelevant, inconclusive discussed: (1) emphasizes whatever Even assume beyond doubt, invalidates through thrust directed toward innocence accused. 45 (2) Significance 'are truth.' Here again misconceives issue. Coerced outlawed regardless content. uncivilized brutalize person telling fabricate condemns. Hence 46 (3) refers allegedly suffering effects effort prove undue pressure a.m., crucial period. Most admitted ignorance events occurring time. Thus render 47 (4) Objection associated fail see, how indicates unreasonableness allegation. Negroes street charge. Their arrest detention necessarily untrustworthy companions. friend can probative purposes enemy disinterested person. function weigh relationships verity statements. Sufficient reasonable pertinent face. Moreover, served companions standing alone, destroy unless indulge unrealistic assumption prison inmate credence. Overlooked respect individuals presumably feels taint imprisonment. conclude, anything wrong background affiants. 48 (5) observes except petitioner; hear brutality inflicted. supposed witnesses. momen' reflection demonstrate likely occur secret witnessed, all, ears inmates. Whether overhearing, course, trier affect itself. 49 (6) taken. Suffice deceiving, realized placed reliance photographs; conviced pictures numerous body. refrain deceptive photographs. 50 (7) perjured apparently foundation, points out. factor relevance coercion. prejudice 51 (8) conceded, warrants treating conceivably effective shut lips silence attorney. door possibility. 52 inadequate affirm below. nature, gravely nights preceding 'brutally beaten, kicked bruised obtain confession' put 'great future safety.' Cf. Three willing testify blows struck 'scream holler times.' perusal reveals completely sleeveless. Doubts exist doubts resolved hearing. asks. flagrant 53 dealing importance. speculate jury's verdict, seem else prosecutrix's somewhat weakened previously positive mistaken Negro. undoubtedly among imposed sentence. Andres States, 740, 880. coerced, impregnated degree impregnation irrelevant clause. seen, enough becomes established rules. Where possibility afforded condemned Petitioner's raised. 54 Fortunately, yet final conclusive o claim. err declining permit prejudices proceed way district exhausted remedies. DOUGLAS RUTLEDGE join dissent. '* deprive life, liberty, property, law; *.' U.S.Const. Amend. XIV, 'Counsel defense questions raised oral brief.' 133, 256, 258. proce ding cause admits counsel.' see 660, says 'it unusual defendants sometimes anticipated repudiated. Photographs before. 242 278, 282, 632, 635.' repudiation otherwise. charging 'If vobis error. K. B. (King's Bench), us, remaining king constructively; pleas, vobis, you, justices court.' Cooley's Blackstone's Commentaries (4th ed., Andrews, 1889), Book III, p. *406 n. also, Clifford, circuit, Plumer, Fed.Cas. 561, 573, 16,056. e.g., 628, 932; McCall 136 349, 186 So. 802; 117 642, 158 153; Lamb 91 396, 107 535; practice, Rules Procedure, rules 32, 33, 36, U.S.C.A. section 687; Reid Cir., 149 F.2d 334; Young 138 838; Gardzielewski, 135 271; Robinson Johnston, 118 998; Strang 820; 571—574, Smith, 331 469, 475, 476, 4, 67 1330, 1333, 1334, 1610; Mayer, 235 55, 16, 59 129. Norstrand Corporation, 168 481; Moore Rogers, Relief Civil Judgments, Yale L.J. 623, 669—674 (1945—1946). 'Such Clause. Vindication Constitutional demand uniformity forty-eight States. Each devise securing situations. stereotype means ascertaining administration intrinsic form, perversion State. 'Florida ample machinery correcting complained. refusing relief proper protecting Amendment.' 416, See, Bute Illinois, 640, 650—654, 763, 768—771, scope states enjoy providing procedures meaning Lee, 248 246, 147, sub nom. 329 808, 621, 690; Burns, 247 98, 517; Smith 245 161, 315; Redus 459, 320 775, 64 85, 88 464; Brown Ala.App. 500, 226. While, reasons respective opinions, foregoing nevertheless, Appeals cited, Russell County. Glen V. Dismukes, 'Q. know inflicted got there? A. didn't (appear) frightened way. don't know. frightened? Did wholly ease? Perfectly ease. See. You o'clock morning, negro boy policemen, assemed perfectly Yes, sir. Didn't upset all? Not nervous? friendly? Rather pleasant. pleasant, well, whethe, promises threats, Dismukes? No, sir.' visited return office Chief Police, replies Solicitor. answers recalled Some response examination Solicitor Now, referred, recall (the petitioner), 'When charge, Samuel?', answering, 'I Saturday night around midnight.' Do that? Then asking, 'And time?' 'Yes, saying, 'Now, jail, Samuel, properly treated?' 'Have threatened beat offered reward, talk?' being, 'No, right. you?' That's few minutes Dr. Grubbs naked, your police?' Yes 2254 legislation revising Code, H.R. 3214, 80th Cong., 2d Sess., passed Congress 1948: 'State custody: remedies 'An pursuant applicant rendering ineffective protect prisoner. deemed section, raise, presented.' (Congressional Record, 8676.)

Category: 3