Legal Document

349 U.S. 375 75 Supreme Court Reporter 814 99 L.Ed. 1161 Aubry WILLIAMS, Petitioner,v.STATE of GEORGIA. Number 412. Argued April 18, 1955. Decided June 6, Mr. Carter Hall, for petitioner. Eugene Gressman, Washington, D.C., as amicus curiae, in support petitioner by invitation the Court. Messrs. E. Freeman Leverett, Robert or Haw. Hawai‘i Reports KFH45 A2 Atlanta, Ga., respondent. Justice FRANKFURTER delivered opinion 1 The has here under review decision a state court rejecting claim infirmity conviction murder based on constitutional ground raised first time an extraordinary proceeding after had been affirmed appeal. Respect State's administration criminal justice requires detailed narrative procedural course this litigation and adequate consideration legal factors relevant to our disposition. 2 Petitioner, Negro, was convicted Fulton County, Georgia, white man sentenced death. According allegations before us, petit jury which him selected following manner: 3 On February 1953, judge County Superior from box names prospective jurors. persons were tickets Negroes yellow tickets. handed deputy sheriff, who turn gave them clerk listing. named jurors subsequently summoned, some excused, remaining 120 available ten panels twelve each serve trial civil cases week March 9, 1953. Of jurors, four Negroes, all assigned docket. 4 10, panel 48 'put upon' Williams at his trial. Thirteen including three excused cause. State peremptorily challenged fourth so that no served finally try Williams. 5 trial, immediately followed selection jury, lasted one day. Twenty-three witnesses appeared against His only defense short unsworn statement effect he not committed crime 'afraid' when signed written confession introduced him. 6 Williams' court-appointed attorney filed formal motion new 27, more amendment 29, overruled, appeal Georgia followed. October 14, judgment. 210 Ga. 207, 78 South Eastern Reporter, 2nd Series 521. 7 December 1, counsel Code Ann., § 70—303.1 In alleged denied equal protection laws Fourteenth Amendment United States Constitution manner selected, organized, impaneled challenged. An affidavit accompanied motion, stating knowledge methods used select jury. A similar stated further 'the same could have discovered (the counsel) exercise ordinary diligence.' law partner submitted third taken part its preparation. 8 January 1954, dismissed appeal, reliance placed almost exclusively upon case Avery versus 345 559, 73 891, 97 1244, laws. pertinence turns sequence two cases2 well substantive facts. 9 rape September 20, 1951, Georgia—the county tried year half later. Avery's drawn with precisely later case, list 60 put whereas here, jurores selected. Avery, however, array him; did not. challenge appealed discrimination disapproved use but judgment actually shown.3 10 Certiorari July 28, 1952, nine weeks case. ground, different-colored whites deprived defendant petition certiorari granted day This reversed May 25, holding made out prima facie unconstitutional showing rebutted. 11 While Court's thus rendered over months it came month Yet rely until six 12 As already stated, court, again That dismissal motion. concluded Williams, having failed him, waived any objections jury's selection. affidavits counsel, counsel's deemed insufficient excuse failure outset 13 rest consideration. It urged facts inherent contradicted affidavits. said own prior fully set practice using juries. 'Due diligence would certainly required make themselves familiar opinions question now raised. follows that, reason, sufficient trial.' 665, 668, 82 217, 219. 14 view entanglement we certiorari. 348 854, 83. Since appointed advised Clerk be position present oral argument Court,4 curiae behalf. 957, 449. 15 brief behalf Court, Solicitor General urged, inter alia, there denial case.5 State, commendable regard responsibility, agreed was, light protection, array. We need add system resulting danger abuse struck down actual basis comparative numbers lists. concession, is whether ruling rests nonfederal without jurisdiction court. 16 rule forbids raising federal questions late stages other than prescribed method, recognized valid power.6 principle clear enough. But unique aspects never-ending arise require individual application particular circumstances. Thus, different us if power consider objection belated it. But, where allows sort stage determined courts matter discretion, are assuming deciding action circumstances is, effect, avoidance right.7 may not, decline entertain while passing kindred issues manner. 17 indicated many times motions verdict favored, final favored even less.8 statute provides such motion,9 'exceptional' 'extraordinary cases. general granting denying primarily discretion appellate will reverse except discretion.10 practice, hesitated grant exceptional For example: 18 Wright Davis, 1937, 184 846, 193 Southeastern KF135 S6 757, death, Three affirmance ex-convict obtained seat impersonating father, whose name properly list. mandamus absolute. said: 19 'In instant proffered presented which, standing dispute, should granted. * 20 '* itself shows benefited, received extreme penalty, right composed entirely upright men. Code, §§ 2—4502, 59—106. do speculate accused suffered injury, vital violated. There conditions injury presumed. *' pages 851, 853, S.E., page 760. 21 rejected contention shown due discovering juror's disqualification.11 22 Smith 1907, Ga.App. 574, 59 311, involved arson. denied, five related deceased wife prosecutor within ninth degree, several prosecutor's children continued kinship affinity. 23 higher purpose subserved every shall accorded mockery unless impartial, also beyond just suspicion partiality. 578, 313. 24 answer prohibited relationship, inquired into relationship impaneled, then added quotation opinion: 25 'Parties searching investigation determine summoned disqualified their Not duty parties contrary encouraged obvious reasons." 582, 315. 26 Crawley 1921, 151 818, 108 238, American Law 368, defendants murder. Two death life imprisonment. rehearing overruled. reversed. showed juror degree murdered man. though know therefore prejudiced.12 27 Doyal 1884, 72, He ready testify ought hung see got they ignorant Despite availability trial.13 like tenor.14 28 All these (barring Harris note 14) contrasted whole situations cannot distinguished ground. rule, noted must way defendant. Cornelious 1941, 156; Wilcoxon Aldredge, 192 634, 873, 146 365; Cumming 1923, 155 346, 117 378; Lumpkin 152 229, 109 664.15 none declare proper panel. contrary, indicate 'array' involving First: poll.16 above demonstrate, gives does appear rational deny challenges likewise inflexible. Second: supports conclusion. If immaterial faulty. felt called reliability affidavits, concluding 'for reason' 'not sufficient.'17 29 conclude declined possessed law. objection, validity sustained discretionary deprive find issue us. 30 fact compel Patterson Alabama, 294 600, 55 575, 79 1082, remanded highest grounds, because grounds identical there: 31 'While relation procedure, ignore features important Federal involved, and, standpoint, stand alone. satisfied dealt 32 'We frequently held correct error disposition requires. And determining what require, bound change, either law, supervened since entered. recognize affect result, setting aside remanding free act. review, sense term, question, deal appropriately arising bearing U.S., 605, 606, 607, 577, 578. 33 factor intervened impels remand court's acknowledgment rights. recalled, influenced contention. Moreover, another remedy open Attorney intimated opportunity designate appropriate remedy.18 34 extraordinary, particularly condemned stake creating situation. difference between capital noncapital offenses differentiation diverse ways distinction becomes relevant.19 think orderly procedure reconsideration Fair principles enforced numerous commands binding compels reject assumption allow go result secured admits unconstitutionally impaneled. Cf. Mooney Holohan, 103, 340, 791. 35 Remanded. 36 Case Sept. 1951—Avery 37 convicted. 1952—Georgia 38 affirms. 1952—certiorari 39 40 Oct. 4, 1952—alleged occurs. 41 17, 1952—Williams arrested, 42 line-up, confesses. 43 21, indicted. Feb. 1953—jury chosen 44 trials during 9th. 1953—this 45 grants 46 47 held, guilty. 11, 1953—sentenced. 1953—formal 49 filed. 30, 1953—case argued 50 51 reverses, 52 53 unconstitutional. 1953—amendment 54 filed; 16, 1953—bill exceptions 1953—Georgia 56 Nov. 23, 1953—Williams 57 Dec. 1953—extraordinary 58 Jan. 1954—trial dismisses 19, 1954—Georgia 1954—this 61 62 CLARK, whom REED MINTON join, dissenting. 63 To borrow phrase Holmes, 'just won't wash.' I, too, am deaf pleas condemned, & N Immigration Nationality Decisions long-established precedents course, always honor reasonable procedures exercises sovereign power. done hundreds sympathetic lose sight limitations powers. 64 how far 'stretched' necessary compare today's majority relied remand. Norris charged common indictment. Prior both interposed claims systematic exclusion Patterson, file bill Alabama decided separate appeals day, Norris' merits 229 Ala. 226, 156 Southern S69 556, dismissing Patterson's time. 270, 567. thereafter conviction. 587, 579, 1074. confronted independent insuperable obstacle reversal. Nevertheless, quite possible realized overruled Norris, might regarded complexion narrow Patterson. therefore, intervening factor. 65 Note magnitude 'important factor' changes relies '(o)n array.' reasons, 'had (by brief) contention.' 66 here. Only General, sole 'question (was) trial,' represented majority's factor,' Assistant expressed superior reach good advocacy dictate argue point thought substantial, office underwent great change mind interim this. argument, questioning point—which raised—the General's below intimated. event, completely loss understand makes conceded clearly govern: 67 'Defendant sets forth States. However, considered rules State.' 669, 68 weaker, relying court—'we say (Williams) law.' asserted 'intimat(ion)' Georgia's 'should remedy.' remedy, can pursue remand; clearer nothing gained 69 Another once evident. through Chief Hughes, 70 convinced presence determination right, confronting anomalous grave situation created reversal companion powerless otherwise provide relief. At least examine powers developed. foreclose opportunity.'1 (Italics supplied.) 606 71 unlike determines itself. insisted possible, permitted decide difficult uncertain so, await ruling. Burford Sun Oil Co., 319 315, 1098, 87 1424. me left resolution pressure 72 Furthermore, agree misconstrued read decisions hear petitioner's merits. Ever Jordan 1857, 545, thereafter. too raise Moon 1882, 687, coming, seven verdict. See 378. fact, reason kind waived.' 637, 876, 365. prisoner's validity. those Appeals consistently position. Ivey 1908, 828, 831, 565, 173, 174, 131, 132, 'If (defendant) array, method complaint deficiency him.' 74 reaching opposite conclusion, i.e., authority untimely factors. First, failing time, went justification inadequate pleading fact. separately numbered alternative impair excuse, 'once all.' Second, favor directed 'challenges poll' Georgia. cites exercised mentioned, much less distinguished, usually distinguish apparent conflicts, fair assume types governed rules. conclusion buttressed differing considerations controlling allowance. Challenges 'directed group collectively causes nature irregularities form, making up panel.' Davis Shulman, Practice Procedure, Page 454. poll solely jurors,' supra, 455. Circumstances thereafter—and upheld—the judgments many, all, juries subject attack. example, illegality overturning verdicts returned tenure. expensive timewasting, disruptive justice. Hence order give irregularity. hand, merely affects rather hundred twenty. 76 dwells discusses detail affording relief strong warns 'we right.' Although ascertain exactly striking theory ever accepted lead 77 elementary supporting reached below.2 purported instances. rise inference guilty evasion—an interpretation specific intent litigant right.3 honestly applied be, dictated precedents, throws obstacles enforcement rights unreasonably interfering vindication rights.4 'evasion.' doubt, 'fair support' previous cases.5 noteworthy Presiding Wyatt wrote who, dissent: 'I (as discrimination) my opinion, conclusive evidence discrimination, reversed.' 209 116, 716, 726. 80 protecting integrity ourselves necessary. Compare 562—563, 892—893, 1244 (petitioner established 'a discrimination' rebut). One acted hardly attempting evade very previously upheld strongly. 81 Similarly, unduly burdensome. concedes '(a) power.' Even somehow strike lacked enough show refuses implication more, evasion. Brown Allen, 344 443, 484—486, 397, 421—422, 469. Indeed, seem withholding depriving right. approaching overturned adequate. appears unassailable attack movant prerequisite found pleaded, take notice conclusively demonstrated indeed lacking. 83 substantial decisions. Petitioner's 'he (establishing claim) conclusory same. Taylor 132 235, 1116; King 174 432, 163 168; Redding 183 704, 189 514; Edge 200 257, 673.6 84 second speaks itself: 85 'Furthermore, contradict statements When pending affirming lower practices employed empaneling putting White slips paper Colored paper. Due raised.'7 86 evident record matter, adhere major departure doctrines requiring respect 'reasonable opportunity' questions. Parker Illinois, 333 571, 708, 92 886. Had power, desirable adjudicate instead sending advantage usual afforded acquitted petitioner, complained about unconstitutionality unfairness allowing remains silent chances acquittal giving diligent one. often imposes hardships preserved conflicting interests wholly courts. Herndon 295 441, 794, 1530. 88 MINTON, CLARK 89 threshold, expresses it, defendant.' challenged, 220. Ga.Code 59—803. 545. 90 rule. meet justify or, improperly constituted, 91 petitioner-defendant. fails legality 231, 664, 665. Such requirement complies Constitution. 480, 419, affirmed. 93 'It settled prisoner, cause fairly 664; 687; 131. supra. follows, error. 94 'The 'that necessity presenting traverse See, connection, supra; 673. cited, dismiss 667—668, 218—219. 95 After insufficient. defendant, deposed: "The information concerning selection, drawing, organizing, assumed jury." Id., Also defendant's deposed "did diligence." Ibid. 96 allegations, 'merely being exercised, supra.' Thus first, trial; second, latter 98 well-established discriminatorily anyone else. promulgation pointed out, process provided Petitioner probably because, affidavit, 'devoted efforts ascertaining 100 number sit disqualified. cases, form opportunity. 101 says suppose has, absurd results changed threshold. knowing constitution lay low built-in penalty violation timely made. 102 critic presented, perform. process. disposed altogether grounds. clear. Edelman California, 357, 358—359, 293, 295, 387: 103 violated seasonably accordance requirements Hulbert City Chicago, 1906, 202 275, 617, 1026; Mutual Life insurance company McGrew, 1903, 188 291, 308, 375, 378, 480. Noncompliance local below. 104 Therefore, writ improvidently adjournment why judged days' given party. Whenever term received, allowed.' Appendix table comparing dates 'And manifest intention uniform size color, impossible drawing jurors; done, else appeared, contended practiced drew them, witness accused, testified none. placing colored colors harm instance, consequently furnished accused.' 124, 722. Counsel informed 3, 1955, 'in probability participate case.' requested inform plans. Under date 22, follows: 'Dear Sir: 'At able come Washington little brief. agreeable, insofar agreement bearing, request letter (for permission case) events agrument. 'Yours truly,' 'Under 26, sent letter: spoken you present. 'He asked appreciate your replied 28: case: originally entered appointment, Assembly enacted legislation authorizing payment Treasury County. money. family contributions paid expenses. one-half cost printing brief, situation, expense connected trip out-of-pocket me. addition, suit Polk calendar absence temporary alimony client continued, turn, client. twice pursued considerable sacrifice. possible. foregoing, simply to. tomorrow (March 1st), possibility believe plan going Washington. 'Very truly yours,' Oral reset end brief: negro impanelled. impanelled sworn mere stricken suffice negroes amount respectfully submit 14th States, authorities cited affirmed.' discuss paragraph: 'If, contend err same.' No mentioned attention parties. e.g., 886; Radio Station WOW, Inc., Johnson, 326 120, 128, 1475, 1480, 2092; Pennsylvania R. Illinois Brick 297 447, 462—463, 561, 796; Central Union Telephone Edwardsville, 269 190, 90, 229. Rogers 417; Abie Bank Bryan (Weaver), 282 765, 772 773, 252, 255, 690; Pierre Louisiana, 306 354, 358, 536, 538, 757; Urie Thompson, 337 163, 172—173, 1018, 1025—1026, 1282; Vandalia Indiana ex rel. Bend, 207 359, 367, 130, 246. E.g., Parks 1948, 204 41, 837; 1914, 141 783, 238; Tyre 1928, 206, 143 778. 70—303. 208 689, 84; Pulliam 1945, 199 709, 250; 129 589, 288; Echols 474; Bivins McDonald, 1934, 299, 177 829. 1913, 337, 189, offense moral turpitude warrant verdict, compared judgment, disqualification. 1939, 745, 651; Ethridge 1927, 164 53, 137 784; Currie 85, 118 724; O'Berry 1922, 153 644, 113 2; Merritt 405, 110 160; Hubbard 1909, 599, 588; Perrett 1915, 820; Cray 371, 140 402. headnotes headnote 'Held, sentence utterly destitute truth uprightness character, shock conscience civilization, soil purity heinous committed, preservation consequence speedy punishment offense, public policy, demand Wallace 1949, 205 751, 145, positive stated: 'There overruling (this) disqualication therein referred to.' 752, 146. Bloodworth 1925, 161 332, 334, 131 80, 81, 1920, 150 680, 902, 903, murder, agree, sheriff judge's message help further, added, "the keep locked verdict", brought in. Some impaneling grand indictment found, known, plea abatement indictment; 'certain jurors' proposition Kato 342, 126 266, panel, single infra. Fudge 1940, 190 259; 1905, 124 79, 298; 1904, 121 348, 303. entire juror. Humphries 1897, 260, 262, 26; Mitchell 1943, 771, 776, 663, 667. proof. purposes arguments, disputed hearing admission truth. Betts Brady, 316 455, 1252, 1595. scrupulous keeping Here, says: 'Fair impaneled.' characterization especially unfortunate full facts, refused infra 830. majority: 'But it.' charge serious restricted findings 417. Fox Film Corporation Muller, 296 209, 183, 158. Wechsler, 263 13, 143; Iowa-Des Moines National Bennett, 284 239, 247, 133, 136, 265. Missouri Gehner, 1930, 281 313, 326, 870. helpful 417, prolix. length. goes saying evading issue. 690, bank's confiscatory estoppel, bank acquiesced regulation years. Hughes 'earlier compliance forfeit protest *.' 257. circumstances, interfered illegal composition harmless error, 172, 1282, Rutledge FELA prevented earlier bar 'all litigation.' 246, Brewer said, 'Even supreme avoid test majority, contrary. consistent treating various basis, interrogated negative answer. front page, Atlanta ran complete story interesting article old convictions two-color reopened Journal carried 'moving ban slips.' subhead 'Court draws prediction action.' all-white adjudicated progress raised.'

Classification Label: 1