''Benton v. Maryland'', 395 U.S. 784 (1969), is a
Supreme Court of the United States decision concerning
double jeopardy
In jurisprudence, double jeopardy is a procedural defence (primarily in common law jurisdictions) that prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same (or similar) charges following an acquittal or conviction and in rare case ...
. ''Benton'' ruled that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the
Fifth Amendment applies to the states. In doing so, ''Benton'' expressly overruled ''
Palko v. Connecticut''.
[.]
Background
John Dalmer Benton was tried on charges of
larceny
Larceny is a crime involving the unlawful taking or theft of the personal property of another person or business. It was an offence under the common law of England and became an offence in jurisdictions which incorporated the common law of Eng ...
and
burglary. He was
acquitted
In common law jurisdictions, an acquittal certifies that the accused is free from the charge of an offense, as far as criminal law is concerned. The finality of an acquittal is dependent on the jurisdiction. In some countries, such as the ...
of larceny but
convicted
In law, a conviction is the verdict reached by a court of law finding a defendant guilty of a crime. The opposite of a conviction is an acquittal (that is, "not guilty"). In Scotland, there can also be a verdict of " not proven", which is co ...
of burglary and was
sentenced to 10 years in prison.
Shortly after Benton's conviction, the
Maryland Court of Appeals
The Supreme Court of Maryland is the highest court of the U.S. state of Maryland. Its name was changed on December 14, 2022, from the Maryland Court of Appeals, after a voter-approved change to the state constitution. The court, which is compose ...
had ruled in ''Schowgurow v. State'' that the portion of the
Maryland Constitution
The current Constitution of the State of Maryland, which was ratified by the people of the state on September 18, 1867, forms the basic law for the U.S. state of Maryland. It replaced the short-lived Maryland Constitution of 1864 and is the fourt ...
that required all
jurors to
swear to their
belief in the existence of God was itself unconstitutional. Since the jurors in Benton's case had been selected under the unconstitutional provision, he was given the option of demanding a
new trial. Benton chose to undergo a new trial, but at the second trial, the state again charged Benton with larceny even though he had been acquitted of larceny in the first trial. The second trial concluded with Benton being found guilty of both burglary and larceny.
Case history
The case was argued December 12, 1968, reargued March 24, 1969, and decided June 23, 1969. It was reargued because the original argument for which the case was granted
certiorari was limited to consideration of two issues: "(1) Is the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment? and (2) If so, was the petitioner 'twice put in jeopardy' in this case?" At the second trial Benton's sentence of 15 years on the burglary count and five years for the larceny was to run concurrently, and after
oral argument
Oral arguments are spoken presentations to a judge or appellate court by a lawyer (or parties when representing themselves) of the legal reasons why they should prevail. Oral argument at the appellate level accompanies written briefs, which also a ...
, as Justice Marshall wrote in his opinion of the court, "it became clear that the existence of a concurrent sentence on the burglary count might prevent the Court from reaching the double jeopardy issue, at least if we found that any error affected only petitioner's larceny conviction. The case was scheduled for reargument, 393 U. S. 994 (1968), limited to the following additional question not included in the original writ: "Does the '
concurrent sentence doctrine,' enunciated in Hirabayashi v. United States, 320 U. S. 81, 105, and subsequent cases, have continuing validity in light of such decisions as ''
Ginsberg v. New York'', 390 U.S. 629, 633, n. 2, ''
Peyton v. Rowe'', 391 U.S. 54, ''
Carafas v. LaVallee'', 391 U.S. 234, 237-238, and ''
Sibron v. New York'', 392 U.S. 40, 50-58?"
Decision
The Supreme Court ruled that the second trial constituted double jeopardy. There was no protection against double jeopardy in Maryland from its
state constitution, but the Court ruled that the
Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment incorporated the Double Jeopardy Clause of the
Fifth Amendment and so made it enforceable against the states. As a result, the Court overturned the larceny conviction. Justice
Thurgood Marshall
Thurgood Marshall (July 2, 1908 – January 24, 1993) was an American civil rights lawyer and jurist who served as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1967 until 1991. He was the Supreme Court's first African-A ...
, writing for the majority, wrote:
It is clear that petitioner's larceny conviction cannot stand once federal double jeopardy standards are applied. Petitioner was acquitted of larceny in his first trial. Because he decided to appeal his burglary conviction, he is forced to suffer retrial on the larceny count as well. As this Court held in ''Green v. United States
Green is the color between cyan and yellow on the visible spectrum. It is evoked by light which has a dominant wavelength of roughly 495570 nm. In subtractive color systems, used in painting and color printing, it is created by a combina ...
'' ... 'conditioning an appeal of one offense on a coerced surrender of a valid plea of former jeopardy on another offense exacts a forfeiture in plain conflict with the constitutional bar against double jeopardy.'
See also
*
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 395
This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 395 of the ''United States Reports
The ''United States Reports'' () are the official record ( law reports) of the Supreme Court of the United States. They include rulings, ...
*
Incorporation of the Bill of Rights
In United States constitutional law, incorporation is the doctrine by which portions of the Bill of Rights have been made applicable to the states. When the Bill of Rights was ratified, the courts held that its protections extended only to the ...
References
External links
*
{{Fifth Amendment crimpro, jeopardy, state=expanded
United States Supreme Court decisions that overrule a prior Supreme Court decision
United States Supreme Court cases
1969 in United States case law
United States Double Jeopardy Clause case law
Incorporation case law
United States Supreme Court cases of the Warren Court