Duncan v. Louisiana
391 U.S. 145 (1968)
Rule of Law:
The Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause incorporates the Sixth Amendment's right to a jury trial, making this right applicable to the states in all criminal cases that would be subject to the Sixth Amendment's guarantee if tried in federal court.
Facts:
- Gary Duncan, a 19-year-old Black man, was driving in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, when he saw his two younger cousins by the roadside with four white boys.
- Knowing his cousins, who had recently transferred to a formerly all-white high school, had experienced racial incidents, Duncan stopped his car and approached the group.
- After a brief conversation, Duncan encouraged his cousins to leave the encounter and get into his car.
- As they were about to drive away, the white youths alleged that Duncan slapped one of them, Herman Landry, on the elbow.
- Duncan and his cousins testified that he had only touched Landry's arm.
- Duncan was charged with simple battery, which under Louisiana law was a misdemeanor.
- The maximum penalty for simple battery in Louisiana at the time was two years' imprisonment and a $300 fine.
Procedural Posture:
- Gary Duncan was charged with simple battery in the Twenty-fifth Judicial District Court of Louisiana, the state's trial court.
- Duncan's request for a jury trial was denied by the trial judge on the grounds that the Louisiana Constitution only provided for jury trials in cases where capital punishment or hard labor could be imposed.
- After a bench trial, the judge found Duncan guilty and sentenced him to 60 days in prison and a $150 fine.
- Duncan sought a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court of Louisiana, which is the state's highest court.
- The Supreme Court of Louisiana denied the writ, finding no error in the trial court's ruling.
- Duncan then appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause guarantee a right to a jury trial in state criminal prosecutions for serious offenses?
Opinions:
Majority - Mr. Justice White
Yes. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees a right of jury trial in all state criminal cases which, were they to be tried in a federal court, would come within the Sixth Amendment's guarantee. The right to a trial by jury in serious criminal cases is a fundamental right essential to a fair trial and the American scheme of justice. The Court traced the history of the jury trial from Magna Carta through the colonial period, emphasizing its role as a safeguard against government oppression, overzealous prosecutors, and biased judges. This right is considered fundamental and is therefore incorporated and made applicable to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, rejecting prior dicta to the contrary. The Court distinguishes between 'serious' and 'petty' offenses, holding that the penalty authorized by the legislature is the primary indicator of seriousness. A crime punishable by up to two years in prison is a serious crime, not a petty offense, and thus requires the state to provide a jury trial upon request.
Dissenting - Mr. Justice Harlan
No. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not incorporate the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial and impose it on the states. The dissent argues against the Court's 'selective incorporation' doctrine, asserting that the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment did not intend for it to apply the Bill of Rights to the states wholesale. The core requirement of due process is 'fundamental fairness,' which does not necessarily require a jury trial; a bench trial can be equally fair. States should be permitted to act as 'laboratories' to experiment with their own systems of criminal procedure without being forced into a uniform federal mold. The majority's approach is criticized as an illogical compromise that simply declares a right is 'in' without sufficient analysis of why it is essential for fairness in every state system.
Concurring - Mr. Justice Black
Yes. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees the right to a jury trial in state criminal proceedings. This conclusion is based on the theory of 'total incorporation,' which posits that the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to make the entire Bill of Rights applicable to the states. While the Court has adopted a 'selective incorporation' approach, this concurrence supports the outcome because it moves closer to the correct, total-incorporationist view. The selective incorporation process is an acceptable alternative to the now-discredited doctrine that no Bill of Rights provisions applied to the states, as it has resulted in most key protections being applied. This view rejects the dissent's subjective 'fundamental fairness' standard in favor of the specific, written protections found in the Bill of Rights.
Analysis:
Duncan v. Louisiana is a landmark case solidifying the doctrine of selective incorporation, by which fundamental rights from the Bill of Rights are made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. By incorporating the Sixth Amendment's jury trial right, the Court significantly expanded federal constitutional protections for criminal defendants in state courts. This decision curtailed the states' autonomy in structuring their criminal justice systems and established a clearer (though not perfectly defined) dividing line between 'serious' and 'petty' offenses based on potential punishment, thereby influencing charging decisions and trial procedures nationwide. The case ensures a consistent, fundamental level of procedural fairness across the country for defendants facing significant jail time.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: Duncan v. Louisiana (1968)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"