Legal Document

393 U.S. 253 89 Supreme Court Reporter 436 21 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 415 Gale or Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 JOHNSON, Petitioner,v.John E. BENNETT, Warden. Number 32. Argued Nov. 13 and 14, 1968. Decided Dec. 16, Ronald L. Carlson, Iowa City, Iowa, for petitioner. William Atlantic Claerhout, Des Moines, respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 In 1934, petitioner was indicted murdering a policeman in Burlington, Iowa. Petitioner claimed that he innocent had not been present at the scene of crime. At trial, several witnesses testified 165 miles away from on day crime committed. The trial judge instructed jury to be entitled an acquittal ground crime, must have shown by preponderance evidence present.1 found guilty second-degree murder, sentenced life imprisonment. His conviction affirmed Court. State versus Johnson, 221 8, 264 Northwestern KF135 N69 596, 267 91 (1936).2 2 this habeas corpus proceeding, argued, among other points, denied him due process law placing burden proving alibi defense. District Southern rejected argument petition. Appeals Eighth Circuit affirmed. 386 Federal Reporter, 2nd 677 (1967). We granted certiorari consider constitutionality instruction, along with issues. 390 1002, 88 1247, 20 102 (1968).3 After we Circuit, sitting en banc, held another case rule shifting defendant defense violates Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment. Stump Bennett, 398 111 (1968).4 view holding, vacate decision remand court reconsideration.5 3 Mr. Justice BLACK dissents. instruction as follows: 'The is upon prove (the) (of alibi) evidence, is, greater weight superior evidence. considered established show very time commission accused place so far away, under such circumstances could ordinary exertion reached where committed same. If has shown, would acquittal. But if proof failed show, you will it proved. jury, whole including alibi, there reasonable doubt defendant's guilt, should acquit him.' See also 21, (1936), which corrected certain errors made its original opinion. issues were whether supp essed favorable intentionally used false petitioner's violation 4 similar one case. State's contention any error harmless because 'the whole' beyond doubt. pointed out that, instruction's inconsistency, minds infer retained nonpresence. 116, 121—122. 5 Stump, said: '(W)e are directly faced retroactivity. recognize panel Johnson proceeding state prisoner, refused relief number matters, instruction. concededly some factual distinctions one. Also significant fact case, unlike counsel carefully preserved objections throughout appellate procedures his unconstitutionality instruction.' (Citations omitted.) 122—123. express no opinion validity suggested Appeals. Instead, deem appropriate definite ruling issue.

Classification Label: 0