Citations 390 U.S. 570 (more) Date decided 1968 | Dissent White, joined by Black | |
Full case name United States v. Jackson Prior history Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Connecticut Subsequent history Clarified in Brady v. United States Majority Stewart, joined by Douglas, Harlan, Brennan, Fortas, Marshall, Warren Similar Witherspoon v Illinois, United States v Jones, Furman v Georgia, Duncan v Louisiana, Barker v Wingo | ||
United States v. Jackson, 390 U.S. 570 (1968), was a United States Supreme Court decision that ruled part of the Federal Kidnapping Act unconstitutional.
Contents
Background
In the wake of the Lindbergh kidnapping Congress decided to adopt a federal kidnapping statute. It was designed to allow federal authorities to step in during kidnappings. Congress believed that federal agents would be more effective than local authorities. The act held that anyone who knowingly transports any person who is unlawfully kidnapped and held for ransom shall be punished by death if the kidnapped person is not liberated unharmed and the jury recommends it. On October 10, 1966 a federal grand jury in Connecticut returned an indictment charging the defendant under the Act. The District Court for the District of Connecticut dismissed the count of the indictment holding the Federal Kidnapping Act is unconstitutional because it makes the risk of death the price for asserting the right to a jury trial. It reasoned that it impairs the free exercise of the sixth amendment.
Opinion of the Court
The decision of the court was delivered by Justice Stewart. The court partially agreed with the District Court. The court objected to the fact the Act stated the defendant “shall be punished…by death…”. Under the law the trial judge is obliged to sentence the defendant to death if the jury recommends it. Sentencing in American courts has long been the right of the sitting judge and not the jury. While the jury may make recommendations the court found that the Congress has overstepped when it gave that power solely to the jury. The court also objected to the issue raised by the District Court. If a defendant were to plead guilty there would be no way to sentence the defendant to death. However, if the defendant attempted an acquittal he would be risking his life if the jury found him guilty. The majority found that the “inevitable effect of any such provision is, of course, to discourage assertion of the Fifth Amendment right not to plead guilty and to deter exercise of the Sixth Amendment right to demand a jury trial. However the majority disagreed with the District Court’s assertion that the Federal Kidnapping Act fails entirely because its penalty clause is deficient. The court determined that the part of the Act which details punishment is severable from the rest of the act. The judgment of the District Court was reversed and sent back for further proceedings.
Dissent
Justice White dissented with Justice Black joining. While he agrees that some defendants would be coerced by the law; Justice White argued because not every defendant would be coered by the law then it should not be ruled unconstitutional. He argues that pleas of guilt should be carefully examined before accepted to make sure that they have been coerced by the threat of capital punishment.
Subsequent developments
The Court revisited the issue of the Federal Kidnapping Act in Brady v. United States, in which the Court reinforced its decision that not all guilty pleas entered under the Act were invalid.