Legal Document

381 U.S. 421 85 Supreme Court Reporter 1576 14 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 693 Dale or Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 DREWS et al.v.MARYLAND. Number 1010. of the June 1, 1965 Francis D. Murnaghan, Jr., for appellants. Thomas baron Finan, Atty. Gen. Maryland, and Robert C. Murphy, Deputy Gen., appellee. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion to dismiss is granted appeal dismissed want jurisdiction. Treating papers whereon was taken as a petition writ certiorari, certiorari denied. 2 Mr. Chief Justice WARREN, with whom DOUGLAS joins, dissenting from denial certiorari.1 3 On Sunday, Lacey, who are Negroes, Helen W. Brown, Drews Joseph Sheeham, white, went Gwynn Oak Park, an amusement park in Baltimore County, Maryland. Ironically, celebrating 'All Nations Day.' Shortly after Page m. they were standing group by themselves had, guard testified, attracted no attention other patrons. approached told them that 'we very sorry but closed colored, colored people would have leave premises. * *' Lacey answered he enjoying himself like took around some more, neither nor Miss Joyner complied request leave. then asked all five leave, refused. He however, 'were polite.' During this interchange between petitioners, patrons began gather around. 4 Upon refusal petitioners summoned County police, who, asking placed under arrest. Meanwhile, crowd surrounding grew larger more hostile, even going so far kick, spit, yell 'Lynch them!' Neither officials county police made any attempt exclude arrest those engaged such conduct. being informed their arrest, joined arms briefly, three men dropped ground assumed prostrate position. Petitioners Brown remained on feet. handcuffs Joyner, escorted her park. Though encountered difficulty pulling women through crowed, left own power. men, hand, had be carried out, offered active resistance. only remark one responding mistreatment someone crowd, said '* forgive him, doesn't know what doing. 5 April 5, 1960, Sheeham charged 'acting disorderly manner, disturbance public peace, at, Amusement Inc., body corporate, place resort County' violation Md. Code Ann. Article 27, § 123 (1957 ed.).2 not prosecuted. waived jury trial, found guilty court, each fined $25 plus costs.3 January 18, 1961, Maryland Appeals, defining conduct 'the doing saying, both, which offends, disturbs, incites, tends incite, number gathered same area,'4 affirmed convictions. 224 186, 192, 167 Atlantic Reporter, 2nd 341, 343-344. 22, 1964, vacated judgments remanded case Appeals consideration light Griffin versus State 378 130, 84 1770, 12 754, Bell 226, 1814, 822. 547, 1900, 1032. remand, purporting distinguish Bell, reinstated reaffirmed prior conviction, Judge Oppenheimer dissenting. 236 349, 204 64. 6 & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions cannot concur Court's review case. (1) There my mind serious question whether can constitutionally punished statute. (2) It seems me apparent record petitioners' protected Civil Rights Act 78 Statutes-at-Large 241, that, our decision Hamm City Rock Hill Lupper Arkansas, 379 306, 384, 13 300, passage must deemed abated I. 7 In Thompson Louisville, 362 199, 80 624, 654, evidence supporting petitioner's conviction effect arrested another charge, 'very argumentative' arresting officers. We set aside it 'so totally devoid evidentiary support render unconstitutional Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment.' Ibid. followed Garner Louisiana, 368 157, 82 248, 207, where showed seats at lunch counter white served, refused upon request. For convicted disturbing peace. purposes decision, we gave statute its broadest possible readings, outlawed peaceful orderly foreseeably might cause commotion, id., 169, S.Ct., 254. Nonetheless, insufficient conviction.5 And Barr Columbia, 146, 1734, 766, reversed breach peace based similar involved Garner. so, observed 8 'because frequent occasions Amendment convictions individuals because acts hostile onlookers, reluctant assume breach-of-peace covers here. Since there convictions, should stand.' Id., 150-151, 1737. 9 do find meaningfully distinguishable Barr. Clearly, nothing did could called conduct: 'sins' up point Negro company politely refusing arrested. Then members briefly linked arms, and, further show passive resistance, ground. They not, officers offer anything way resistance either ejection. As observed: 'In resisting command park, defendants used force against anyone else; held back fell ground.' Md., 355, A.2d, 68. Nor argue cf. supra, use profanity, Sharpe State, 231 401, 190 628, cert. denied, 375 946, 350, 11 275; indeed, words spoken nature plea forgiveness mob. All refuse assist ejection segregated 10 two lie down. bit testimony trial judge possibly inferred behavior following: 'Q. Now, Officer, you always persons arrested? 'A. When little trouble getting Park any—when them, yes. What Juretha Joyner? By Did Defendants? 15 No, don't recall. 16 not? 17 sir. 18 female Defendants power? 19 pull crowd. 20 walked out? 21 through. 22 'The Court: Why through? 23 Because didn't voluntarily. 24 came when pulled? 25 did, yes, sir.' 26 undoubtedly truth officer's surmise; am sure woman liked ejected solely race friend. suspect reluctance also resulted small measure fear pulled shouting, spitting, kicking 27 Even if lawful,6 great distinguishing women, lesser extent, refusals establishments before us see how outlawing 'drunkenness conduct'7 given fair warning, Bouie 347, 1697, 894, (or, lack conduct) criminally punishable.8 cannot, least without argument full Court, join letting stand holds remotely disorderly, secure knowledge wholeheartedly cooperate removal waiting squad car, will forthcoming.9 II. 28 308, 388, held: 29 1964 forbids discrimination places accommodation removes attempts served equal basis category punishable activities. Although present cases occurred enactment Act, still-pending passage.' 30 become final until today. That establishment covered 201 243, clear.10 take it, therefore, does regard 'peaceful basis.' agree. Surely completely orderly, indicated above, think postarrest amounted than natural fully understandable reaction arbitrary exclusion 31 recent decisions, have, rightly opinion, recognized denied service likely react less wholehearted cooperation. Today, fear, forgets elemental principle human conduct, demands, pain criminal penalty, patience Job. Blow North Carolina, 684, 635, 603, adduced restaurant, whereupon proceeded sit down floor mat outside door, stood near door. making crime enter lands license forbidden so. McKinnie Tennessee, 380 449, 1101, eight entered vestibule entrance into restaurant proper, vestibule, measured 6' x 6'4", approximately minutes. pushing shoving, unclear initiated Negroes attributable during minutes, vestibule. Again, (for conspiracy injure trade commerce) been Act. concluded constituted acquiesce federal rights. draw conclusion 32 dissenting, course suggest civil rights demonstrator, anybody else, has right block traffic, bar access man's home business. observation Cox 536, 554-555, 453, 464: 33 constitutional guarantee liberty implies existence organized society maintaining order, itself lost excesses anarchy. control travel streets clear example governmental responsibility insure necessary order. A restriction relation, designed promote convenience interest all, susceptible abuses discriminatory application, disregarded attempted exercise which, circumstances, entitled protection. One justified ignoring familiar red thought means social protest. one, contrary traffic regulations, insist street meeting middle Times Square rush hour form freedom speech assembly. Governmental authorities duty keep open available movement. demonstrators cordon off street, private building, allow pass agree listen exhortations.' 34 But examples cry happened Negro, friends celebrate Day' Park. Despite facts she behaved complete order dignity, law, race. She handcuffed, displayed (though resistance) actively peace.' Today declines companions. join. appellee proper appeal. However, KF62 2103 (1958 ed., Supp. V), Congress provided, pertinent part: 'If improvidently highest court appeals, mode alone shall dismissal; regarded acted duly presented time taken.' Section provides, 'Drunkenness generally; habitual offenders. 'Every person drunk, acting manner [in specified locations, including amusement], misdemeanor; thereof, subject fine fifty dollars, confined jail period sixty days both imprisoned discretion court. This never (and hope does) let fact penalty relatively reviewing presenting important questions. E. g., 203-204, 627-628 ($10 fine); Yick Wo Hopkins, 118 356, 1064, L.Ed. 220 fine). Compare 51-552, 462-463, 471. noted allegation judicial notice presence disturbance. U.S., 173, 256. transcript instant judge's memorandum opinion indicates sort lawful. view 24-13 (1958) authorizes appointment special 'for protection property county,' may well enjoyed status officer 754. here first time, Griffin. Oppenheimer, drew remand meaning today, too supposed carry, voted investigation relation county: Wood, 'special officer' case, virtually authority Collins [the Griffin] Montgomery joint participant action. appoint serve corporations. Code, Sections 35-3 (1958). Circuit taking additional determine Wood appointed these sections Code. If was, reversed.' 355; 68 (Oppenheimer, J., dissenting). Thus still guard's action state action, thereby rendering his unconstitutional. Yet axiomatic 'one failing obey violative Constitution.' Wright Georgia, 373 284, 291-292, 83 1240, 1245, 349. Moreover, strong unlawful constitute See 403, 404, 630, 275. With herein, compare note 6, re Cromwell, 232 409, 194 88. Also, Niemotko 247, 250, 71 9, 10, 340 268, 271, 325, 327, 328, 95 267, 280. Whether something know. inquire, '[c]onviction charge sheer due process.' De Jonge Oregon, 299 353, 362, 57 255, 259, 81 278. 164, 251-252; 206, 629; Cole 333 196, 201, 514, 517, 92 644. crowd; none Park; next substantial portion food moved interstate commerce, entire §§ 201(b)(2), 201(b)(4), 201(c). 201(b)(3). unwilling serves food, hearing issue. denies reason regards decisive factor, Walker 1557, since petitioner too.

Classification Label: 1