Moore v. Dempsey
Moore et al. v. Dempsey, 261 U.S. 86 (1923), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled 6–2 that the defendants' mob-dominated trials deprived them of due process guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It reversed the district court's decision declining the petitioners' writ of habeas corpus. This case was a precedent for the Supreme Court's review of state criminal trials in terms of their compliance with the Bill of Rights.
| Moore v. Dempsey | |
|---|---|
| Argued January 9, 1923 Decided February 19, 1923 | |
| Full case name | Frank Moore, et al. v. E. H. Dempsey, Keeper of Arkansas State Penitentiary |
| Citations | 261 U.S. 86 (more) 43 S. Ct. 265; 67 L. Ed. 543; 1923 U.S. LEXIS 2529 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Defendants convicted, Phillips County, Arkansas; affirmed, Arkansas Supreme Court; certiorari denied, U.S. Supreme Court; petition for habeas corpus granted, Pulaski County, Arkansas; vacated, Arkansas Supreme Court; petition for habeas corpus denied, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Holding | |
| Mob-dominated trials were a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Federal courts were furthermore duty-bound to review habeas corpus petitions that raised claims of discrimination in state trials, and to order the release of unfairly convicted defendants if the alleged violations were found to be true. Eastern District of Arkansas reversed and remanded. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Holmes, joined by Taft, McKenna, Van Devanter, Brandeis, Butler |
| Dissent | McReynolds, joined by Sutherland |
| Sanford took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. XIV | |
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.