Today in Supreme Court History: March 13, 1963

3/13/1963: Ernesto Miranda is arrested.

Comments

[Dr. Ed 2]

[Dan Schiavetta]

Klopfer v. North Carolina, 386 U.S. 213 (decided March 13, 1967): prosecutor can't say "nolle prosequi" (decide not to go forward) and yet hold the defendant on a long leash; North Carolina nolle prosequi procedure, under which defendant could go where he wants but can't move to dismiss and is subject to trial at prosecutor's discretion, violates Sixth Amendment speedy trial right

Clyatt v. United States, 197 U.S. 207 (decided March 13, 1905): conviction for peonage (abducting debtors and forcing them to work off the debt) reversed because no showing of post-abduction detention (this case seems to conflict with a case I summarized here on January 4, United States v. Gaskin, 1944))

Fortnightly Corp. v. United Artists Television, Inc., 392 U.S. 390 (decided March 13, 1968): transmitting via cable TV motion pictures was not "performing" them so as to violate Copyright Act (which was then amended to expand definition of "performing", see American Broadcasting Cos. v. Aereo, Inc., 2014)

FTC v. Jantzen, Inc., 386 U.S. 228 (decided March 13, 1967): Finality Act of 1959 (changing the FTC's procedures for enforcement of the Clayton Act) did not void existing FTC orders

United States v. Dakota-Montana Oil Co., 288 U.S. 459 (decided March 13, 1933): Congress can be said to approve of an agency's construction of a statute if it re-enacts the statute without material change (here, basis of an oil depletion allowance)

Texas v. Florida, 306 U.S. 398 (decided March 13, 1939): Texas interpleads three other states to determine which state gets the estate taxes of a man whose domicile might have been in one of four states; Court confirms Special Master's conclusion that it was Massachusetts (dead man was a multimillionaire who lived all over the place), but mostly expounds on its original jurisdiction and concludes that it encompasses equitable devices such as interpleader

Affolder v. New York, Chicago & St. Louis R.R. Co., 339 U.S. 96 (decided March 13, 1950): under Federal Safety Appliance Act, railroad is strictly liable for failure of couplers to connect on contact (plaintiff lost his leg falling off car that he was trying to stop due to non-coupling)

Johnson v. Yellow Cab Transit Co., 321 U.S> 383 (decided March 13, 1944): on a military reservation (Fort Sill) United States law applied, not Oklahoma law prohibitng transportation into state of liquor without a license (Court orders return to Officers' Club of liquors shipped in from Illinois)

Hipolite Egg Co. v. United States, 220 U.S. 45 (decided March 13, 1911): federal court has jurisdiction over seizing adulterated food after it has reached its destination in-state (here, cans of "preserved eggs" used for baking which were found to be tainted with boric acid -- a sign that cockroaches were around during preparation, if you ask me!)

United States v. Post, 148 U.S. 124 (decided March 13, 1893): law limiting letter carriers to eight hours a day included non-letter-carrying time (e.g., other tasks around the post office)

[Commenter_XY]

captcrisis, I have a question. does the place you get this data from allow a sort in chronological order? I wonder of seeing the cases you post in chron order would give additional insight.

Thoughts?

I bet Johnson somehow has to get extended to weed (in some form). Just watch.

[Dan Schiavetta]

These summaries are created by me, after I do a Westlaw search for cases decided on this date and skim through the cases. Though occasionally I track the language of the syllabus because that’s already the best concise summary. Thanks for asking.

I like to skip around chronologically, and as you can probably tell, I find slave cases wherever I can (slavery was part of the Court’s jurisprudence for one-third of its history), even though with early cases the verbose and archaic language is hard to wade through. Maybe putting everything in chrono order would be interesting.

[Commenter_XY]

I really enjoy reading the summaries. Every once in a while, I go to Oyez and try to look up a case here.

[Michael P]

In which way do you think Johnson would be extended to weed? Anyone in the military or with a security clearance should know that weed is still illegal under federal law, and using it (to say nothing of selling it) can lead to lots of problems in relation to working in or for the federal government. I can't see it being stocked at an Officers' Club as long as that's true.

[apedad]

Agreed.

Even investing in a marijuana/cannabis related business could have an adverse impact on your security clearance.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Technically, the North Carolina procedure meant that if the prosecutor ever called Klopfer’s case for trial, Klopfer could make a speedy-trial motion. But he wasn’t allowed to file such a motion *unless* the prosecution tried to re-activate the case.

The prolonged case involved a civil-rights sit-in where the jury was divided. The retrial was then postponed according to the unconstitutional procedure. Other defendants who had been convicted were pardoned, but Klopfer couldn’t be pardoned because the governor can only grant pardons after conviction, and Klopfer hadn’t been convicted. Also, a new trial would probably let Klopfer get the charges dismissed because of the Supreme Court’s retroactive application of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (legalizing sit-ins at segregated restaurants after the fact).

So, keeping the charges semi-active was a dick move all things considered. He had trouble travelling abroad because technically there were criminal charges pending against him.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Thanks for the added depth.

[John F. Carr]

In Massachusetts a criminal case may be placed "on file" by the judge. This suspends the case. It can allow a person to walk away from a conviction without being sentenced. It raises fairness concerns like a nolle prosequi that leaves the case alive. In 2007 the Supreme Judicial Court reined in the process, allowing a defendant to demand prompt sentencing and requiring that filed cases be revived only for cause. See Criminal Procedure Rule 28(e) and the 2008 reporter's notes.

[Frank Drackman]

3/13/1963: Ernesto Miranda is arrested. and didn't get his "Miranda Rights" such Injustice!!!!!!

[CJColucci]

I once read, but can't find the source now, that Mr. Miranda was arrested later in life and went to trial. (I assume he was the most properly Mirandized arrestee ever.) During jury selection, the panel was asked whether his being that Ernesto Miranda would predispose them in any way.

[Dr. Ed 2]

"Miranda v. Arizona: After Miranda’s conviction was overturned by the Supreme Court, the State of Arizona retried him. At the second trial, Miranda’s confession was not introduced into evidence. Miranda was once again convicted and sentenced to 20-30 years in prison. "

https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and-case-summary-miranda-v-arizona

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Thanks for the lineup photo of the 9 suspects.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

"Ma'am, do you see the man who raped you among these nine men? Now take your time."

[John F. Carr]

In the 1990s Saturday Night Live had a skit with Clarence Thomas in a police lineup. I think Bill Clinton was in it too.

[Dan Schiavetta]

You're right. I'll make the change for next time. This also harmonizes the case with Gaskin. Thanks!