Legal Document

490 U.S. 794 109 S.Ct. 2201 104 L.Ed.2d 865 ALABAMA, Petitionerv.James Lewis SMITH. No. 88-333. Argued April 24, 1989. Decided June 12, Syllabus An Alabama grand jury indicted respondent for burglary, rape, and sodomy, all related to a single assault. He agreed plead guilty the burglary rape charges in exchange State's agreement dismiss sodomy charge. The trial judge granted motion charge, accepted respondent's plea, sentenced him concurrent terms of 30 years' imprisonment on each conviction. Later, succeeded having his plea vacated went three original before same judge. found counts. This time, imposed term life conviction, plus conviction consecutive 150 explained that he was imposing harsher sentence than following because evidence presented at trial, which had been unaware time convinced too lenient. Court Criminal Appeals affirmed convictions but remanded resentencing. Supreme request review reversed remanded, holding increased created presumption vindictiveness similar set forth North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 711, 89 2072, 23 656 (1969). Held: Pearce does not apply when after is greater previously plea. Simpson Rice, decided with supra, overruled. Pp. 798-803. (a) Application limited circumstances there "reasonable likelihood" an unexplained increase product actual part sentencing authority. Where no such reasonable likelihood, defendant has burden proving without aid presumption. 798-800. (b) In cases like present one, where relevant information available will usually be considerably less leniency may have shown response longer appropriate, are enough justifications heavier second it cannot said more likely who imposes motivated by vindictiveness. 800-803. 557 So.2d 13, (Ala., 1988), remanded. REHNQUIST, C.J., delivered opinion Court, BRENNAN, WHITE, BLACKMUN, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, JJ., joined. MARSHALL, J., filed dissenting opinion, post, p. 803. P. David Bjurberg, Montgomery, Ala., petitioner. Paul J. Larkin, Jr., Washington, D.C., as amicus curiae, supporting petitioner, special leave Court. Delores R. Boyd, respondent. Chief Justice REHNQUIST 1 James Smith pleaded rape. charge dropped. vacated. charges, convicted each, received given ter held this We hold arises first based upon follows trial. 2 1985, sodomy. All court 30-years' moved withdraw claiming entered knowingly voluntarily. denied motion, reversed, finding properly informed penalties associated crimes guilty. 494 182 (1986). 3 case reassigned State reinstate first-degree sodomy; charges. At victim testified broken into her home middle night, clad only underwear ski mask wielding kitchen knife. Holding knife chest, raped sodomized repeatedly forced engage oral sex him. attack, lasted hour, occurred victim's own bedroom, just across hall from room young children lay sleeping. also offered postarrest statement, admitted many details offenses. Respondent later took stand repudiated testifying instead bed girl friend attack place. 4 returned verdict See App. Pet. Cert. 28-30. As explained, heard "[respondent's] side story"; whereas now, "has evidence," including testimony least five times, him, threatened Ibid. stated new about nature their impact victim, together its observations "mental outlook [the offenses] [his] position during trial," "proper beyond [him] bargain." Id., 30. 5 convictions, well sentences then sentence, divided vote. Ex parte Smith, 13 (1988). majority under our decision can "upon re onviction [a] overturned appeal unless justified " 'events subsequent trial.' So.2d, 15. Because thought events occurring prior imposition sentence—e.g., crime effect victim—the required aside sentence. 6 justices argued did 16. view, "should allowed receive concessions return then, successful bind bargain if trial." 17. Were otherwise, they argued, "could go chance acquittal knowing could originally given." Ibid.1 7 conflicting results reached lower courts question whether applies plea,2 we certiorari, 488 1003, 781, 102 773 (1989), now reverse. 8 While discretion permits consideration wide range assessment punishment, see Williams New York, 337 241, 245-249, 69 1079, 1082-1084, 93 L.Ed. 1337 (1949), recognized must exercised purpose punishing appeal. U.S., 723-725, S.Ct., 2079-2080. "Due process law, requires against successfully attacked play receives 725, 2080. "In order assure absence motivation, concluded whenever severe reasons doing so affirmatively appear." Id. 726, 2081. Otherwise, vindictive purpose—a rebutted 'objective . justifying sentence.' Texas McCullough, 475 134, 142, 106 976, 981, (1986) (quoting United States Goodwin, 457 368, 374, 2485, 2489, 73 74 (1982)). 9 appeared face announce rule sweeping dimension, made clear "do[es] every higher retrial." 138, 979. "the evil [Pearce ] sought prevent" "enlarged trial" "vindictiveness judge." Chaffin Stynchcombe, 412 17, 25, 1977, 1982, 36 714 (1973) (the i designed prevent retrial "for some valid reason need flexibility process," "premised apparent guard resentencing process"). "may operate any proof improper motive thus block legitimate criminal conduct," 373, 2488, application, "other 'judicially means effectuating rights secured [Constitution],' "where 'objectives most efficaciously served,' 979, quoting Stone Powell, 428 465, 482, 487, 96 3037, 3046, 3049, 49 1067 (1976). Such those likelihood," remains prove vindic- tiveness, Wasman States, 468 559, 569, 3217, 82 424 (1984). 10 Colten Kentucky, 407 104, 92 1953, 32 584 (1972), example, refused two-tiered system gave misdemeanor inferior right de novo superior court. observed represented "completely fresh determination guilt or innocence" being "asked do over what already done correctly." 117, 1960. If resulted penalty, "it penalty lenient penalty." Consequently, rejected proposition were "with sufficient frequency warrant prophylactic rule." 116, Similarly, (1973), arose jury, appeal, jury. unlikely "personal stake" "sensitive institutional interests might occasion sentences."3 26-28, 1982-1983. 11 think reasoning leads conclusion attributable Even both sentences, A "voluntary" "intelligent," Boykin Alabama, 238, 242, 1709, 1711, 274 (1969), "is defendant's admission open committed acts charged indictment," Brady 397 742, 748, 90 1463, 1468, 25 747 (1970). But sort satisfies requirement far brought out full merits. 12 demonstrates, 796-797, course gather fuller appreciation extent charged. conduct give insights moral character suitability rehabilitation. Supra, 797. Grayson, 438 41, 53, 98 2610, 2617, 57 582 (1978) (sentencing authority's perception truthfulness behalf considered sentencing). Finally, factors indicated present. 752, 1471. Here, too, although conducting simply "do[ing] Colten, Each these distinguishes case, others it, Pearce. There, presides trials expected context roughly considerations first; change therefore subject however, one Our here consistent companion complained-of followed Rice previous 714, 2074. "no attempting justify Rice's sentences. ." With respect, appear possible distinction between differing two trials, 14 failure note described stems case's important developments constitutional law pleas. leniency, supra; prosecutor offer "recommendation reduction charges" bargaining process, Bordenkircher Hayes, 434 357, 363, 663, 667, 54 604 (1978), upheld prosecutorial practice threatening guilty, through threat insists ibid.; mutual support avoid pursued directly providing pleads Corbitt Jersey, 439 212, 221-223, 99 492, 498-499, 58 466 (1978). 15 Part reaching different therefore, development relating Court's amount generally affords compared Believing, do, basis overrule extent. contends case. decline reach remand Alabama. 16 judgment cause further proceedings inconsistent opinion. 17 It ordered. 18 dissenting. 19 After challenging validity ground misinformed face, resentenced drastically initially result bargain. today finds infirmity result. I, continue believe that, "if exceed respect guarantee double jeopardy." 726-727, 2089, (1969) (Douglas, concurring, joined J.) (emphasis added). I dissent. application rehearing, denied. four dissented. Compare, instant (1988), Sutton, 197 Conn. 485, 498 A.2d 65 (1985), Gilliss, 645 F.2d 1269 (CA8 1981), Bawdon, 386 N.W.2d 484 (S.D.1986), McKenzie Risley, 842 1525, 1536-1537 (CA9 1988) (en banc). adopted postconviction stage Blackledge Perry, 417 21, 94 2098, 40 628 (1974). There felony latter availed himself initial conduct. seven years 6-month misdemeanor. On facts, analogous "prosecutor clearly considerable stake discouraging misdemeanants appealing." 27, 2102. clear, Due Process Clause offended possibilities punishment pose realistic likelihood 'vindictiveness.' And other dealing pretrial decisions modify defendant, continued stres "a mere opportunity insufficient 384, 2494, (1982);

Classification Label: 0