Legal Document

491 U.S. 263 109 S.Ct. 2419 105 L.Ed.2d 218 Eugene John CARELLA, Appellant,v.CALIFORNIA. No. 87-6997. June 15, 1989. Rehearing Denied Aug. 30, See 492 937, 110 23. PER CURIAM. 1 On March 24, 1986, after a jury trial in the Municipal ourt of Beverly Hills Judicial District, California, appellant Carella was convicted grand theft for failure to return rented car.1 At his trial, court adopted prosecution's requested instructions applying statutory presumptions Cal. Veh. Code Ann. § 10855 (West 1987)2 and Penal 484(b) 1988).3 Specifically, over Carella's objection, charged as follows: 2 (1) "Presumption Respecting Theft by Fraud: 3 "Intent commit fraud is presumed if one who has leased or personal property another pursuant written contract fails its owner within 20 days made demand certified registered mail following expiration lease rental agreement so rented." 4 (2) Embezzlement Leased Rented Vehicle: 5 "Whenever any person vehicle wilfully intentionally five expired, that shall be have embezzled vehicle." App. 15. 6 appeal Appellate Department Superior Court, prosecution confessed error, acknowledging these two unconstitutionally imposed conclusive core elements crime. The disagreed, however, validated on ground "never offered testimony concerning nonexistence facts. . ." Id., at 61. This disposition plainly odds with prior decisions this Court we noted probable jurisdiction, 488 964, 488, 102 525 (1988), now reverse. 7 Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment denies States power deprive accused liberty unless proves beyond reasonable doubt every element offense. In re Winship, 397 358, 364, 90 1068, 1072, 25 368 (1970). Jury relieving burden violate defendant's due process rights. Francis v. Franklin, 471 307, 1965, 85 344 (1985); Sandstrom Montana, 442 510, 99 2450, 61 39 (1979). Such directions subvert presumption innocence accorded persons also invade truth-finding task assigned solely juries criminal cases. 8 We explained courts should ask whether question mandatory, is, specific instruction, both alone context overall charge, could been understood jurors require them find fact State certain predicate Sandstrom, supra, 514, S.Ct., 2454. understandably does not dispute case were phrased commands, those explicit unqualified effect elsewhere charge merely permissive. told first "shall embezzled" it returned agreement; second, "intent presumed" from demand. 9 These mandatory directly foreclosed independent consideration facts proved established offenses which charged. relieved proof articulated namely, proving evidence essential crime doubt. violated Amendment. 10 insists error event harmless. As similar cases, do decide issue here. 515, 2454, murder instructed "law presumes intends ordinary consequences voluntary acts." held that, because might shifting persuasion, instruction constitutional error. There claim harmless even though considered conclusive, remanded state consider chose. 11 Rose Clark, 478 570, 106 3101, 92 460 (1986), again said subject harmless-error rule. "Nor equivalent directed verdict State. When presume malice facts, still must existence Connecticut Johnson, 73, 96-97 [103 969, 982-983, 74 823] (1983) (POWELL, J., dissenting). many conclusively establish intent, no rational defendant committed relevant act but did intend cause injury. erroneous simply superfluous: found, Winship's words, 'every necessary' offense doubt." Rose, U.S., 580-581, 3107-3108 (footnote citations omitted). observed although authority make determination ourselves, ordinarily so. Hence, lower instance. 12 follow same course here reverse judgment California without deciding acts fail presumed. 3107-3108. Accordingly, reversed, further proceedings inconsistent opinion. 13 It ordered. 14 Justice SCALIA, whom BRENNAN, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN join, concurring judgment. 15 I agree decision below sensible permit conduct analysis write separately, only implicitly acknowledged (by quoting passage 3107-3108, see ante, 266) what applicable assessing wholly unlike typical form such analysis. usual harmlessness requires "the record whole," United Hasting, 461 499, 509, 103 1974, 1980, 76 96 (1983), order supported improperly admitted overwhelmingly other evidence, see, e.g., Milton Wainwright, 407 371, 372-373, 2174, 2175-2176, 33 (1972); Harrington 395 250, 254, 89 1726, 1728, 23 284 (1969). an expansive inquiry would here, think important explain why describe mode appropriate. Court's mere citation inadequate ends, since, reasons describe, infra, 271-272, itself ambiguous. 16 disapproved use " 'conflict[s] overriding law endows accused,' 523, 2459, (1979) (quoting Morissette States, 342 246, 275, 72 240, 256, L.Ed. 288 (1952)), 'invade[s] [the] fact-finding function' assigns jury," 2459 Gypsum Co., 438 422, 446, 98 2864, 2878, 57 854 (1978)). right embodies "a profound about way enforced justice administered." Duncan Louisiana, 391 145, 155, 88 1444, 1450, (1968). structural guarantee "reflect[s] fundamental exercise official power—a reluctance entrust plenary powers life citizen judge group judges." 156, 1451. A may assuredly insist upon observance when against him overwhelming guilt That found constitutionally impermissible direct Martin Linen Supply 430 564, 572-573, 97 1349, 1355-1356, 51 642 (1977). Carpenters 330 395, 67 775, 91 973 (1947), treat mistakenly express authorization ratification hold union criminally liable officers' participation antitrust conspiracy—regardless how existed. said: 17 "No matter strong association's organization's through agents conspiracy, there setting out correctly limited liability under [the Norris-LaGuardia Act, 47 Stat. 70,] association organization agents. For guilty evidence. knowing jury's based condemned actual acts. 408-409, 782 (footnotes 18 spelt record, according procedure standards appropriate trials." Bollenbach 326 607, 614, 66 402, 406, 350 (1946). "Findings cannot cure deficiencies findings resulting court's instruct crime." Cabana Bullock, 474 376, 384-385, 689, 696, 704 (1986). 19 principles necessarily circumscribe availability apply presumption. If present had jury, "You are car you he blue eyes lives States," matter, purposes assuring jury-trial right, contained car. nothing permitted it, reaching verdict. And problem cured appellate unmistakably guilt, represent finding judges, jury. verdict, wrong entity judged guilty." supra 578, 3106. Four Members concluded much 823 (plurality opinion), "every natural necessary act." 78, 973. wrote plurality: "An disputed renders irrelevant relied rather than failed reviewing contribute view intent then irrelevant. To allow perform function evaluating never performed function, give too weight society's interest punishing little method made." 85-86, 976-977 21 plurality therefore determined—I correctly—that "rare situations" can confident [such an] play role verdict." 87, 977. opinion mentioned among establishing acquitted (and affecting charges), regard admitted. Ibid. 22 Another basis conclusive-presumption explains our holding Terms ago Pope Illinois, 481 497, 107 1918, 95 439 (1987). Although misdescription offense, latter like former deprives factfinding role, analyzed similarly. (Thus, earlier, similarly curable guilt. 782-783.) convictions "community standar[d]" allegedly obscene magazines, 'taken whole, lac[k] serious literary, artistic, political, scientific value.' 498-499, 1920 (citation First required different finding: "whether value material, taken whole." 501, 1921. Even precise convict defendants, joined believed juror plausibly magazines utterly lacking community standard come conclusion standard. id., 504, 1923 (SCALIA, concurring). case, lead presumption: closely related ultimate fact, making functionally "beyond doubt," Chapman 386 18, 87 824, 828, 705 (1967), support conviction. discuss precedent, relies exclusively of, quotation from, Clark.* 266-267. possibility issue) respect "[I]f proven killing occurred, done maliciously. But rebutted. 574, 3104. explaining presumption, granting State, some circumstances deemed observed: 24 "When 3107 (emphasis original). suggests just discussed connection Pope. Were all subject, willing more apply, today's regarded terse misleading. Elsewhere, says applicable: "Where developed establishes doubt, fairness satisfied affirmed," 579, 3106; 583, 3109. best misleading suggest qualification governs 26 Rose's description sort available accepted type case—a rebuttable need above cannot) case. regarding malice, could—indeed, compelled weigh overcome. elemental difficulty placed thing say will disregarded doubt"; quite factual fact—because resting fact—will disregarded. 27 reasons, concur Court. violation 10851(a) 1987), provides nonconsensual taking driving "public offense" accomplished either permanently temporarily" title possession. reads: "Except provided Section Vehicle Code, * (1979), cited, 266, (or properly) proposition applicable. "decline[d] reach" State's flawed "constituted error," "in unconstitutional constitute error." 526-527, 2460.

Classification Label: 0