Legal Document

398 U.S. 323 90 Supreme Court Reporter 1757 26 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 300 Earl PRICE, Petitioner,v.State of GEORGIA. Number 269. Argued April 27, 1970. Decided June 15, Allyn M. Wallace, Savannah, Ga., for petitioner. Mathew Robins, Atlanta, respondent. Mr. Chief Justice BURGER delivered the opinion Court. 1 We granted writ to consider power a State retry an accused murder after earlier guilty verdict on lesser included offense voluntary manslaughter had been set aside because trial error. 2 Petitioner was charged with killing Johnnie Mae Dupree in indictment filed Superior Effingham County, Georgia. He entered plea not and tried October 17, 1962. The jury returned crime fixed sentence at 10 15 years state penitentiary. jury's made no reference charge murder. 3 Appeals Georgia reversed conviction erroneous instruction ordered new trial. Price versus State, 108 Ga.App. 581, 133 South Eastern Reporter, 2nd 916 (1963). 4 On 20, 1967, petitioner again placed under original indictment. Before commencement second autrefois acquit, claiming that place him would expose double jeopardy view initial judge rejected and, close trial, instructions his so could have rendered offense. That jury, like first, found manslaughter, then penalty years' imprisonment. 5 sought direct review Georgia,1 but court transferred case Georgia, declaring '(o)nly questions as application plain unambiguous provisions Constitution being involved, * is one consideration *.' 224 Ga. 306, 307, 161 825, 826 (1968). 6 heard appeal affirmed conviction, rejecting petitioner's argument, among others, retrial constituted jeopardy. 118 207, 163 243 held Brantley 132 573, 64 Southeastern KF135 S6 676 (1909), aff'd, 217 284, 30 514, 54 L.Ed. 768 (1910), decided this question adversely quoted from case's syllabus: 7 'When person has indicted convicted if he voluntarily seeks obtains subject another generally indictment, upon such cannot successfully interpose former acquittal or regard thereto.' Ga.App., 208, S.E.2d, 244. 8 rehearing, contending, contends here, longer controlling. relied Green States, 355 184, 78 221, 199 (1957), ex rel. Hetenyi Wilkins, 348 Federal 844 (C.A.2d Cir. 1965), cert. denied, Mancusi Hetenyi, 383 913, 86 896, 667 (1966). His contention rejected. In deciding still binding precedent it, noted it involving only 'plain unambiguous' constitutional provisions. motion denied. Thereafter denied certiorari, writ, 395 975, 89 2138, 23 764 (1969), now reverse. 9 (1) Ball, 662, 669, 16 1192, 1194, 41 (1896), observed: 'The Fifth Amendment, declares, 'nor shall any be (for same offense) twice put life limb.' prohibition against punished, (Emphasis added.) 'twice jeopardy' language thus relates potential, i.e., risk time will 'same offense' which initially tried. 11 circumstances give rise forbidden potential much discussion Ball case, example, expressly provision prevented when aside. doing, effectively formulated concept continuing where criminal proceedings run their full course. See 189, 224, (1957). 12 principle necessarily applicable case. obtained reversal by taking appeal. Accordingly, aspect bar crime. However, first verdict, limited offense, required Such result flows inescapably Constitution's emphasis explication prior decisions 13 An early deal restrictions retrials Kepner 195 100, 24 797, 49 114 (1904), Amendment's barred Government appealing prosecution,2 over dissent Holmes argued there until finally resolved. even retried acquittal, part proceeding. 14 Similar issues did fully claim Court's attention argument (1957).3 There first-degree second-degree A majority 'waived' retrial, holding came end discharged This conclusion rested two premises. First, considered 'implicit acquittal' Second, more broadly, reasoned greater ended 'was given opportunity return verdict' instead reached charge. U.S., 191, S.Ct., 225. Under either these premises, case—that accused's jeopardy—was applicable. rationale applies here. implicit case4 allow reversed. But, cases illustrate, consistently refused rule continues whether express implied opportunity5 relevant factual distinction between States. Although whereas was, both cases, Double Jeopardy Clause Amendment written terms punishment. 17 courts nonetheless persuasive authority favor reliance (1910). presented situation defendant's ultimately led After appeal, defendant sued out error Court, contending 'that exemption privileges immunities citizens Fourteenth forbids abridge',6 'been acquitted country murder',7 '(h)e should never (sic) *.'8 tersely contentions as: 18 'absolutely without merit. It States.' 285, 515. 19 when, although actively developing federal doctrines based took very restricted approach reviewing similar decisions. While may some vitality viable must deemed overruled subsequent Court.9 (2) 20 One further remains. Because trials, suffered punishment submits harmless judged criteria Chapman California, 386 18, 87 824, 705 (1967), Harrington 250, 1726, 284 (1969). 21 reject contention. Clause, we noted, cast hazard ultimate legal consequences verdict. To subjected ordeal viewed lightly.10 Further, perhaps importance, determine induced find less serious rather than continue debate innocence. 22 (3) asked parties submit post-argument memoranda directed can re-indicted law. These indicate answer our appears depend construction several statutes fashion remedial orders. reverse also remand enable resolve pertaining had. Reversed remanded. 25 BLACKMUN decision Georgia's provides of, 'all involve Ga.Const., Article VI, § 2, 4. portion dealt action re-indict judgment jurisdiction cause. 669—670, 1194—1195. partially Sanges, 144 310, 609, 36 445 (1892), interpreted Judiciary Act 1891 hold obtain Shortly faced somewhat akin instant Trono 521, 121, 50 292 (1905), defendants Philippine murder, assault. court's judgment, them increased sentences. affirmed. Four Justices position assault waived respecting concurred stating rationale. previous year, however, concurrence indicated that, him, waiver theory too narrow—instead jeopardy, Of four dissenters, two, McKenna White, violation provision. Acceptance Trono's Holmes' broad complain But survived unscathed present day. 'waiver theory' distinguished resting 'a statutory Islands—a territory just recently conquered long-established procedures were alien common law.' 197, 228. Green, rest amalgam interests—e.g., fairness society, lack finality, waiver, others. People Jackson, N.y.2d 440, 285 N.Y.S.2d 8, 231 North 722 (1967). Brief Plaintiff Error, 692, O.T.1909, Page 2. Id., 5. Ibid. Palko Connecticut, 302 319, 58 149, 82 288 (1937), overturn appealed product charges. ruled standards Benton Maryland, 784, 2056, 707 determined applied through Amendment. genre, shared Palko's fate Benton. last affirming September 24, 1968, well before decided. retroactive application, see Waller Florida, 397 387, 391 n. 1184, 1186, 435 (1970), courts' themses Brantley, though understandable, place. significant difference manslaughter. reason concern stigma penalty. prepared meet evidence prosecution community well.

Classification Label: 0