Maryland v. Baltimore Radio Show, Inc. Et Al.
1950 U.S. LEXIS 2435, 338 US 912, 70 S. Ct. 252 (1950)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The Supreme Court's denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari is not a decision on the merits of the case and carries no precedential value or implication regarding the Court's views on the lower court's opinion.
Facts:
- Following two highly publicized child murders in the Baltimore-Washington D.C. area, police arrested Eugene H. James for one of the murders.
- Local Baltimore radio stations broadcast news of the arrest.
- One broadcast announced a 'sensation' and reported that James had confessed to the 'dastardly crime.'
- The broadcast also stated that James had a long criminal record.
- Furthermore, the broadcast detailed that James had reenacted the crime for police officers at the scene and led them to the murder weapon.
- Due to the widespread and prejudicial nature of the broadcasts, James's counsel concluded that an impartial jury trial was impossible and elected for a trial by judge instead.
Procedural Posture:
- The Criminal Court of Baltimore City held several radio stations in contempt of court for broadcasts about a pending murder case and imposed fines.
- The radio stations appealed the contempt judgment to the Court of Appeals of Maryland, the state's highest court.
- The Court of Appeals of Maryland reversed the convictions, finding that they violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
- The State of Maryland, as petitioner, filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking it to review the decision of the Maryland Court of Appeals.
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 Supreme Court's denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari imply approval or disapproval of the lower court's decision or establish any legal precedent?
Opinions:
Opinion Respecting Denial of Certiorari - Justice Frankfurter
No. The denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari simply means that fewer than four members of the Court deemed it desirable to review the lower court's decision and carries no implication whatsoever regarding the Court’s views on the merits of the case. Justice Frankfurter explains that there are numerous technical or policy-based reasons for denying certiorari, including a cloudy record, the need for an issue to be further developed in lower courts, or the judgment not being final. He emphasizes that this denial should not be misconstrued as the Court's approval or disapproval of the Maryland Court of Appeals' ruling, which balanced First Amendment press freedoms against the Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial. The Court's refusal to hear the case does not adjudicate the complex and unresolved constitutional issues at stake.
Analysis:
This opinion is legally significant not for its substantive holding, but for its powerful procedural clarification on the meaning of a certiorari denial. It serves as a definitive statement that 'cert denied' is not a decision on the merits, a crucial concept for law students to grasp. By explicitly stating that the denial does not endorse the Maryland court's broad protection of the press, Justice Frankfurter highlights the unresolved tension between free press and fair trial rights, flagging it as a major issue the Court had yet to tackle. The opinion warns the legal community against reading meaning into the Court's discretionary docket choices and reinforces that the Court will wait for the proper case to adjudicate momentous issues.
Unlock the full brief for Maryland v. Baltimore Radio Show, Inc. Et Al.