Citations 378 U.S. 1 (more) End date 1964 | Concurrence Douglas | |
Full case name Malloy v. Hogan, Sheriff Majority Brennan, joined by Warren, Black, Goldberg, Douglas Dissent Harlan, joined by Clark Dissent White, joined by Stewart Similar Duncan v Louisiana, Griffin v California, Escobedo v Illinois, Wolf v Colorado, Mapp v Ohio | ||
Malloy v hogan
Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1 (1964), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States deemed defendants' Fifth Amendment privilege not to be compelled to be witnesses against themselves was applicable within state courts as well as federal courts. The majority decision holds that the Fourteenth Amendment allows the federal government to enforce the first eight amendments on state governments.
Contents
The test for voluntariness used by Malloy was later abrogated by Arizona v. Fulminante (1991).
Malloy v hogan
Background
Malloy, a petitioner, was sentenced to a year in jail for unlawful gambling. After three months, he was released from jail and put on probation for two years and was asked to testify to a state inquiry into gambling and other criminal activities in which Malloy was involved.
He refused to answer the questions to avoid incriminating himself. The court put him back in jail until he testified.
Question
Is a state witness's Fifth Amendment guarantee against self-incrimination protected by the Fourteenth Amendment?
Decision
In a 5-4 decision, Justice Brennan wrote the majority of the court in support of Malloy. The court noted that "the American judicial system is accusatorial, not inquisitorial" and the Fourteenth Amendment protects a witness against self-incrimination. Therefore, both state and federal officials must "establish guilt by evidence that is free and independent of a suspect's or witnesses' statements."