Legal Document

395 U.S. 147 89 Supreme Court Reporter 1503 23 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 162 Ben or Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 FRANK, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. Number 200. Argued Dec. 12, 1968. Decided May 19, 1969. Rehearing Denied Oct. 13, See 90 34. John baron Ogden, Oklahoma City, Okl., for petitioner. Peter L. Strauss respondent. Mr. Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Petitioner was charged with criminal contempt District Western Oklahoma. The charge resulted from his violation an injunction issued by that court at request Securities and Exchange Commission. restrained petitioner using interstate facilities in sale certain oil interests without having filed a registration statement Petitioner's demand jury trial denied. He convicted, suspended imposition sentence placed him on probation three years. Appeals affirmed. Frank versus States, 384 Federal Reporter, 2nd 276 (C.A.10th Cir. 1967). We granted certiorari, 392 925, 88 2295, 20 1384 (1968), to determine whether entitled trial. conclude he not. 2 Sixth Amendment Constitution gives defendants right 'all prosecutions.' However, it has long been rule so-called 'petty' offenses may be tried jury. See, e.g., Columbia Clawans, 300 617, 57 660, 81 L.Ed. 843 (1937). For purposes jury, is treated just like all other offenses. defendant unless particular offense can classified as 'petty.' Dyke Taylor Implement Mfg. Co., 391 216, 1472, 538 (1968); Bloom Illinois, 194, 1477, 522 Cheff Schnackenberg, 373, 86 1523, 16 629 (1966). 3 In determining 'petty,' this sought objective indications seriousness which society regards offense. supra, 628, 663. most relevant indication severity penalty authorized its commission. Thus, Clawans held not required prosecution engaging business license, carrying maximum days. Recently, we state simple battery, possible prison two Duncan Louisiana, 145, 1444, 491 (1968). 4 ori nary prosecutions, authorized, actually imposed, criterion. such cases, legislature included within definition crime itself judgment about 162, S.Ct 1454, n. 35. But person found great many different types offenses, ranging disrespect acts otherwise criminal. Congress, perhaps recognition scope contempt, courts impose penalties but any specific limits their discretion; categorized contempts 'serious' 18 Code KF62 §§ 401, 402.1 Accordingly, prosecutions where no imposed best offense.2 supra. sentences up six months constitutionally Ibid.3 5 Government concedes would have necessary present case if had received excess months. Indeed, sentenced more than violates terms probation.4 argues petitioner's actual one upon those convicted petty and, thus, case. agree. 6 Numerous federal statutory schemes allow significant periods example, under law, offenders five years lieu or, addition term imprisonment. § 3651. making statute applicable 'any punishable death life imprisonment,' clearly made apply petty, well serious, so doing, did indicate additional place category. words, Congress decided punished combination Therefore, cases simply months' imprisonment $500 fine. A offender are violated, then imprisoned 3653. 7 Cheff, undertook categorize exercise supervisory power over lower courts, analogy exceeding could affording trial.5 think used should equally here. Penalties presently including probation, Probation is, course, infringement personal freedom, certainly less onerous restraint jail itself.6 noncontempt viewed possibility years'probation enough make 'serious.' This ill-equipped contrary determination cases. As said '(d)oubts must resolved, subjectively recourse judge own sympathy emotions, standards observed laws practices community taken gauge social ethical judgments.' U.S., S.Ct., 8 congressional error deny 9 Affirmed. 10 HARLAN STEWART, adhering views expressed dissenting Harlan 215, 1487, Part & N Immigration Nationality Decisions Harlan's separate 380, 1526, considering themselves bound decisions join above these premises. 11 Chief WARREN, whom DOUGLAS joins, dissenting. 12 Court's decision today marks unfortunate retreat our recent enforcing Constitution's command accused afforded fundamental e.g. At same time, announces alarming expansion nonjury power, excessive use recently limited inescapable effect recession will put new weapon chilling political expression unrestrained hands judges. Now freed checks restraints system, local judges achieve, years, control groups unpopular through injunctive together punitive employment device, conditions offer almost unlimited possibilities abuse. Because do desire contribute result, because believe rationale rests misreading statute, note my dissent. I. 13 Today's stands open suggestion utilize oppressive avoiding, unsettled times these, issues squarely faced denying minorities full rights First Amendment. order inhibit, summarily, group seeking propagate even least irritating views, need only give quick glance recognize numerous options now him. If, instance, large number civil advocates, labor unionists, student demonstrators brought into minor trespass disturbance charges, though proposes lives Without wait conviction, free impose, will, lengthy conditions—the oppressive. until violated brought. issue blanket against group, cite members en masse slightest violation, them then, imposing strict conditions, effectively deprive meaningful freedom indefinite period Despite efforts curb (see Carroll President Commissioners Princess Anne, 393 175, 347, 21 325 (1968)) become, when newly liberated too awesome man. situation presented Walker City Birmingham, 388 307, 87 1824, 1210 (1967), example freely available 14 6, ante) illustrate high degree officers, maintain before them. require keep 'reasonable hours' addition, prohibit leaving court's jurisdiction officer's permission. By instructing officer construe reasonable hours restriction strictly refuse permission leave jurisdiction, thereby virtually nullify person's movement. Moreover, insist 'work regularly,' regulate working well. Finally, associate 'law-abiding' persons, significantly limiting association, condition, does limit revocation 'knowing 'forces choose acquaintances peril. 15 Even restrictive they are, represent judge; others, change add time during five-year period.1 ability, further, six-month period, after four months, leaves room doubt enforce restrictions severely. And finally, ease find broad enhances value device harassment tactic. Once bother fair adversary hearing committing prison, Mempa Rhay, 389 128, 254, 19 336 counsel proa tion hearings misdemeanor hamstringing protest groups, imagination conceiving receiving end frist trend leeway there nothing State allowing years' much Thus far, standard system; while ruled supra), yet Duncan, supra). Furthermore, practice looking legislative definitions 'existing * Nation,' 161, 1453, crimes attaches, might accept State's professed some probationary sentences.2 II. 17 painful aspect today's impermissible consequences. holding 'within congressonal offenses' astounding. first place, acted quite regard classification set out 1909 (the section based Act March 4, 1909, chapter 321, 335, 35 Statutes-at-Large 1152) passed system 1925 (Act 1925, 521, 1, 43 1259). There history 3651 intended modify, complement, to, relate definition, 1; reference capital prohibited, itself, citation 1. More importantly, however, every affirmatively determined affect earlier crimes—including felonies rendered probation's imposition. second 'add' expanded necessarily binding us seems suggest. cannot, me, reliance Nation' rewrite terming regardless underlying sentence. misapprehension better understood analyzing how arrived decision. judge, acting man serve purports rely on, overrule, 'objective offense,' ante, 148, traditionally partiu lar thus (1937); supra; notes, criteria' definitional states offense, followed ruling months', permissible. pursues since also provided apparently section, petitioner, whose fell limit, Such leap provision ascribes am make, misconstrues nature statute. scheme purport classes crimes, evincing indication' 'seriousness attaches. Rather, designed sentencing aside statutorily prescribed try instead fashion specific, ameliorative individual court. consistent probations's basic purpose providing 'an individualized program offering young unhardened opportunity rehabilitate himself institutional confinement,' Roberts 320 264, 272, 64 113, 117, 41 (1943), 'should stain convict,' Murray, 275 357, 48 146, 149, 72 309 (1928). focus offender. 'Through investigation suitable probation,' House Judiciary Committee stated support bill signed 'the enabled discriminate adapt treatment fit character circumstances offender.' H.R. Rep. 423, 68th Cong., 1st Sess., (1924). necessity 'individualize each case, careful, humane, comprehensive consideration offender,' held, requires 'exercise discretion' exceptional flexibility.' Burns 287 220, 53 154, 155, 77 266 (1932). exercising discretion, orienting toward misdemeanors intend society's general, except provide inappropriate Although holds 'Congress 'serious," presumably willing hold upper light serious take mean areas economic public health regulation tax, antitrust, drug control, often granted, defendant's stating outset intentiont o grant terms. raise possibility3 shows enacted 'petty-serious' distinction, intending impact judgments relative generally. 22 view background, fact not, events, 'definitions,' dangers noted six-months-plus stand say permissible sentence, served both. were revoked dissent otherwise. BLACK, 24 cannot what 'petty crime.' believe, punishment classify means people Bill Rights. Article III, 2, provides that: 25 'The Trial Crimes, Cases Impeachment, shall Jury *.' VI 26 'In enjoy speedy trial, impartial 27 Neither provisions merely thinks one. possibly minuscule thought petty. way thinking, governmental unit conduct amount ever (See 223, 1476, 538.) Nor stock idea naming 'contempt,' crime. Green 356 165, 193, 78 632, 648, 672 (dissenting opinion), Barnett, 376 681, 724, 84 984, 1007, opinion). Those who commit Rights general. 28 reasons netitled contempt. 402, 3691, 3692. Section 3691 constempts involving willful disobedience orders 'act thing done omitted constitutes falls exception 'entered suit action prosecuted name of, behalf States.' If creating specifies penalty, course 1472 relied defines '(a)ny misdemeanor, exceed fine $500, both suspended, 'impose originally imposed.' Under '(W)e constrained (contempt) proceedings here equivalent procedure prosecute According (1964 ed.), offense.' Since *, sui generis, warrant Cheff's eyes prior decisions. therefore properly jury.' 379—380, 1525 1526. monthly reports officer, law-abiding hours, work regularly, report job changes district officer. multiplied, emerging work-release programs. appendix Government's brief survey law practices. question never arise, looking, rather meted out, required.

Classification Label: 0