Legal Document

390 U.S. 511 88 Supreme Court Reporter 1155 20 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 69 Ronald L. JOHNSON, Petitioner,v.COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. Number 702. Argued March 6 and 7, 1968. Decided April 1, John M. Harrington, Jr., Boston, Mass., for petitioner. Brian E. Concannon, respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 In 1964 petitioner was tried convicted in a Massachusetts Superior murder, armed robbery, other offenses. The conviction affirmed by the Judicial of Massachusetts. Commonwealth versus Johnson, 352 Mass. 311, 225 North Eastern Reporter, 2nd 360. We granted certiorari because there appeared to be substantial questions concerning voluntariness confession which admitted evidence at his trial. After oral argument study record, we have reached conclusion that record relevant constitutional claims now asserted is insufficient permit decision those claims.** writ therefore dismissed as improvidently granted. Cf. Smith State Mississippi, 373 238, 83 1265, 10 L.Ed. 321; Painten, 389 560, 660, 19 770. 2 It so ordered. 3 Writ dismissed. 4 Mr. Justice MARSHALL, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE FORTAS join, dissenting. 5 Petitioner first-degree murder police officer sentenced death. He urges an involuntary used against him, violation due process. facts making statement are not controversy. shooting evening August 1963, drove off car. seen officers who had been called scene alarm proceeded pursue him their chase high speeds several blocks, during course petitioner's automobile struck wall caromed parked cars, crashed into bus. limped away from heavily damaged car attempt flee but almost immediately apprehended police. 7 taken station booked 9:35 p.m. first placed cell then headquarters sometime after 10:15 Between midnight a.m. he lineup identification purposes upon four separate occasions. During this period constantly surrounded large numbers policemen. Various witnesses estimated number present room alone 45 100, least 32 testified hearing on new trial motion having some contact night. Numerous identified killer lineups, although continually maintained innocence face accusations. Apart also questioned intermittently period. At about 5:50 a.m., 2, began give inculpatory statements, response questions, were introduced him. clear interrogation carried sole purpose eliciting incriminating statements since already positively numerous times, while killer. 8 has sixth-grade education IQ. 86. over eight hours custody prior confessing, no time advised right remain silent or consult attorney, judge found fact aware rights confessed. arrest bleeding cut inch one-half long side head. various lineups subjected, blood visible Two doctors later examined petitioner, one 10, 14. They reported following: 'He (petitioner) headaches dizziness when bends down gets up. blackout spell station. Things appear blurry vomited couple times.' weeks confession, underwent brain operation subdural hematoma; surgeon operated hematoma 'could anywhere two weeks.' 9 On these court voluntary, result 'free choice admit, deny, refuse answer.' Lisenba People California, 314 219, 241, 62 280, 292, 86 166 (1941). While it true Court's earlier decisions cases (relied here) inconsistent such holding, e.g., supra; Gallegos Nebraska, 342 55, 72 141, 96 (1951); Stein New York, 346 156, 73 1077, 97 1522 (1953), & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions thought more recent would made abundantly obtained under circumstances here constitutionally inadmissible its maker. See, Culombe Connecticut, 367 568, 81 1860, 1037 (1961); Haynes Washington, 503, 1336, 513 (1963); Davis Carolina, 384 737, 1761, 16 895, (1966); Clewis Texas, 386 707, 87 1338, 18 423 (1967). says finds capital case too 'insufficient' resolution claim. am unable agree, question largely undisputed. particularly understand disposition case, full argument, light Greenwald Wisconsin, 519, 1152, 77, reverses, without are, if anything, less compelling issue involuntariness than case. 11 To sure, challenged only theory, rejected, subjected physical abuse However, challenge outlined above emerged testimony specifically judge. Yet, once concluded abuse, did go consider 'the totality circumstances,' U.S., 521, S.Ct., 1154, obtained. stated should raised theory relies, opinion reveals went pass itself, ruling request trial, voluntary. Accordingly, do feel necessary us decide whether duty sua sponte initially appears considered passed appellate review state court. 12 respectfully dissent. ** Petitioner's claim voir dire beaten out not. itself attack any ground, raise challenges argued Court. defense primarily directed persuading jury impose death penalty. unsworn close summations said, 'all prosecutor presented you true. There sense my taking stand all points me. * All ask just clemency. put life your hands. Please recommend clemency, imprisonment.'

Classification Label: 8