johnson
louisiana
argued
march
decided
may
warrantless
arrest
robbery
made
appellant
home
basis
identification
photographs
committed
magistrate
thereafter
appeared
lineup
represented
counsel
identified
victim
another
robbery
tried
latter
offense
jury
convicted
verdict
authorized
louisiana
law
cases
crime
necessarily
punishable
hard
labor
state
law
provisions
require
unanimity
jury
trials
offenses
punishment
may
hard
labor
jury
trials
capital
cases
louisiana
affirmed
conviction
rejecting
appellant
challenge
provisions
violative
due
process
equal
protection
claim
lineup
identification
forbidden
fruit
invasion
appellant
fourth
amendment
rights
appellant
conceded
duncan
louisiana
decided
trial
began
retroactive
effect
sixth
amendment
apply
case
held
provisions
louisiana
law
requiring
jury
verdicts
criminal
cases
violate
due
process
clause
failure
satisfy
standard
pp
mere
fact
three
jurors
vote
acquit
mean
nine
vote
convict
ignored
instructions
concerning
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
honestly
believe
guilt
thus
proved
pp
want
jury
unanimity
alone
establish
reasonable
doubt
pp
louisiana
legal
scheme
providing
unanimous
verdicts
capital
jury
cases
verdicts
otherwise
varies
difficulty
proving
guilt
gravity
offense
designed
serve
rational
purposes
facilitat
ing
expedit
ing
reduc
ing
expense
administration
justice
constitute
invidious
classification
violative
equal
protection
pp
since
evidence
constituting
fruit
illegal
arrest
used
appellant
trial
validity
arrest
issue
lineup
conducted
exploitation
arrest
authority
appellant
commitment
magistrate
purged
lineup
procedure
primary
taint
white
delivered
opinion
burger
blackmun
powell
rehnquist
joined
blackmun
post
powell
post
filed
concurring
opinions
douglas
filed
dissenting
opinion
brennan
marshall
joined
post
brennan
filed
dissenting
opinion
marshall
joined
post
stewart
filed
dissenting
opinion
brennan
marshall
joined
post
marshall
filed
dissenting
opinion
brennan
joined
post
richard
buckley
reargued
cause
filed
brief
appellant
louise
korns
reargued
cause
appellee
brief
jack
gremillion
attorney
general
louisiana
jim
garrison
justice
white
delivered
opinion
louisiana
constitution
code
criminal
procedure
criminal
cases
punishment
necessarily
hard
labor
tried
jury
vote
nine
jurors
sufficient
return
either
guilty
guilty
verdict
principal
question
case
whether
provisions
allowing
verdicts
certain
cases
valid
due
process
equal
protection
clauses
fourteenth
amendment
appellant
johnson
arrested
home
january
arrest
warrant
victim
armed
robbery
identified
johnson
photographs
committed
crime
identified
lineup
counsel
victim
still
another
robbery
latter
crime
involved
case
johnson
pleaded
guilty
tried
may
jury
convicted
verdict
due
process
equal
protection
challenges
louisiana
constitutional
statutory
provisions
rejected
louisiana
courts
la
appealed
noted
probable
jurisdiction
conceding
duncan
louisiana
sixth
amendment
applicable
case
see
destefano
woods
appellant
presses
equal
protection
due
process
claims
together
fourth
amendment
claim
also
rejected
louisiana
affirm
ii
appellant
argues
order
give
substance
standard
state
virtue
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
must
satisfy
criminal
cases
see
winship
clause
must
construed
require
verdict
criminal
cases
contending
appellant
challenge
instructions
case
concededly
jurors
told
convict
convinced
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
claim
verdict
case
unanimous
evidence
insufficient
support
appellant
focuses
instead
fact
less
jurors
voted
convict
argues
three
voted
acquit
standard
satisfied
conviction
therefore
infirm
note
outset
never
held
jury
unanimity
requisite
due
process
law
indeed
expressly
said
criminal
cases
due
process
law
denied
state
law
dispenses
necessity
jury
twelve
unanimity
verdict
jordan
massachusetts
dictum
accord
maxwell
dow
dictum
statements
moreover
cases
indicating
proof
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
implicit
constitutions
recognizing
fundamental
principles
deemed
essential
protection
life
liberty
davis
see
also
leland
oregon
dissenting
opinion
brinegar
coffin
entirely
apart
cases
however
view
fact
three
dissenting
votes
acquit
raises
question
constitutional
substance
either
integrity
accuracy
majority
verdict
guilt
appellant
contrary
argument
breaks
two
parts
shall
consider
separately
first
nine
individual
jurors
unable
vote
conscientiously
favor
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
three
colleagues
arguing
acquittal
second
guilt
said
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
one
jury
members
conclusion
deliberation
still
possess
doubt
neither
argument
persuasive
numerous
cases
defined
reasonable
doubt
one
based
reason
arises
evidence
lack
evidence
johnson
accord
bishop
app
schneiderman
supp
sd
cal
haupt
supp
nd
rev
grounds
winship
supra
recognized
evidentiary
standard
impress
ing
trier
fact
necessity
reaching
subjective
state
certitude
facts
issue
citation
omitted
considering
first
branch
appellant
argument
find
basis
holding
nine
jurors
voted
conviction
failed
follow
instructions
concerning
need
proof
beyond
doubt
vote
one
nine
failed
reflect
honest
belief
guilt
proved
appellant
effect
asks
us
assume
minority
jurors
express
sincere
doubts
guilt
fellow
jurors
nevertheless
ignore
vote
convict
even
deliberation
exhausted
minority
jurors
grounds
acquittal
pursued
might
persuade
members
majority
acquit
mere
fact
three
jurors
voted
acquit
demonstrate
nine
jurors
majority
attended
reason
evidence
one
developed
reasonable
doubt
guilt
grounds
believing
majority
jurors
aware
responsibility
power
liberty
defendant
simply
refuse
listen
arguments
presented
favor
acquittal
terminate
discussion
render
verdict
contrary
far
likely
juror
presenting
reasoned
argument
favor
acquittal
either
arguments
answered
carry
enough
jurors
prevent
conviction
majority
cease
discussion
outvote
minority
reasoned
discussion
ceased
persuasive
effect
serve
purpose
minority
continues
insist
upon
acquittal
without
persuasive
reasons
support
position
juncture
basis
denigrating
vote
large
majority
jury
refusing
accept
decision
least
minds
beyond
reasonable
doubt
indeed
point
dissenting
juror
consider
whether
doubt
reasonable
one
made
impression
upon
minds
many
men
equally
honest
equally
intelligent
allen
appellant
offers
evidence
majority
jurors
simply
ignore
reasonable
doubts
colleagues
otherwise
act
irresponsibly
casting
votes
favor
conviction
alter
longstanding
perceptions
jury
behavior
overturn
considered
legislative
judgment
unanimity
essential
reasoned
jury
verdicts
must
basis
unsupported
assumptions
conclude
therefore
nine
jurors
voted
convict
state
satisfied
burden
proving
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
remaining
question
due
process
clause
whether
vote
three
jurors
acquittal
said
impeach
verdict
nine
demonstrate
guilt
fact
proved
beyond
doubt
hold
course
state
proof
perhaps
regarded
certain
convinced
jurors
instead
nine
even
compelling
required
convince
fact
convinced
jurors
fact
remains
nine
jurors
substantial
majority
jury
convinced
evidence
view
disagreement
three
jurors
alone
establish
reasonable
doubt
particularly
heavy
majority
jury
considered
dissenters
views
remains
convinced
guilt
rational
men
disagree
equivalent
failure
proof
state
indicate
infidelity
standard
jury
verdicts
finding
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
regularly
sustained
even
though
evidence
jury
justified
reasonable
doubt
see
quarles
bell
even
though
trial
judge
might
reached
conclusion
jury
see
takahashi
even
though
appellate
judges
closely
divided
issue
whether
sufficient
evidence
support
conviction
see
johnson
app
want
jury
unanimity
equated
existence
reasonable
doubt
emerges
even
clearly
fact
jury
federal
operates
unanimity
rule
instructed
acquit
defendant
reasonable
doubt
guilt
see
holt
agnew
mathes
devitt
federal
jury
practice
instructions
agree
unanimously
upon
verdict
defendant
acquitted
merely
given
new
trial
downum
dreyer
illinois
perez
wheat
doubt
minority
jurors
indicates
existence
reasonable
doubt
appear
defendant
receive
directed
verdict
acquittal
rather
retrial
conclude
therefore
verdicts
rendered
nine
jurors
automatically
invalidated
disagreement
dissenting
three
appellant
deprived
due
process
law
iii
appellant
also
attacks
violative
equal
protection
clause
provisions
louisiana
law
requiring
unanimous
verdicts
capital
jury
cases
permitting
verdicts
cases
conclude
however
louisiana
statutory
scheme
serves
rational
purpose
subject
constitutional
challenge
order
facilitate
expedite
reduce
expense
administration
criminal
justice
state
lewis
la
louisiana
permitted
less
serious
crimes
tried
five
jurors
unanimous
verdicts
serious
crimes
required
assent
nine
jurors
serious
crimes
unanimous
verdict
jurors
stipulated
appellant
case
nine
jurors
rather
five
required
verdict
discern
nothing
invidious
classification
held
free
federal
constitution
try
defendants
juries
less
men
williams
florida
three
jurors
voted
acquit
earlier
said
demonstrate
appellant
convicted
lower
standard
proof
obtain
conviction
categories
louisiana
law
state
must
prove
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
number
jurors
must
convinced
increases
seriousness
crime
severity
punishment
may
imposed
perceive
nothing
unconstitutional
invidiously
discriminatory
however
state
insisting
burden
proof
carried
jurors
serious
crimes
severe
punishments
issue
appellant
nevertheless
insists
dispensing
unanimity
case
disadvantaged
compared
commit
less
serious
capital
crimes
respect
latter
correct
state
make
conviction
difficult
requiring
assent
jurors
appellant
might
well
ultimately
acquitted
committed
capital
offense
indicated
constitute
denial
equal
protection
law
state
may
treat
capital
offenders
differently
without
violating
constitutional
rights
charged
lesser
crimes
crimes
triable
jury
appellant
position
easier
convince
nine
jurors
convince
five
simply
challenging
judgment
louisiana
legislature
body
obviously
intended
vary
difficulty
proving
guilt
gravity
offense
severity
punishment
remain
unconvinced
anything
appellant
presented
legislative
judgment
defective
constitutional
sense
iv
appellant
also
urges
nighttime
arrest
without
warrant
unlawful
absence
valid
excuse
failing
obtain
warrant
subsequent
lineup
identification
forbidden
fruit
claimed
invasion
fourth
amendment
rights
validity
johnson
arrest
however
beside
point
clear
evidence
might
properly
characterized
fruit
illegal
entry
arrest
used
trial
prior
lineup
johnson
represented
counsel
brought
committing
magistrate
advise
rights
set
bail
time
lineup
detention
appellant
authority
commitment
consequently
lineup
conducted
exploitation
challenged
arrest
means
sufficiently
distinguishable
purged
primary
taint
wong
sun
judgment
louisiana
therefore
affirmed
footnotes
coffin
contains
lengthy
discussion
requirement
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
similar
standards
proof
ancient
hebrew
greek
roman
law
well
common
law
england
discussion
suggests
late
century
held
bound
standard
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
assumption
standard
essential
civilized
system
criminal
procedure
see
generally
duncan
louisiana
justice
blackmun
concurring
join
opinion
judgment
cases
add
comment
obvious
need
saying
imply
regard
state
system
wise
one
vote
means
conclude
system
constitutionally
offensive
legislator
disfavor
matter
policy
task
however
pursue
strike
happens
impress
us
undesirable
legislative
policy
hesitate
say
either
system
employing
standard
rather
minimum
afford
great
difficulty
justice
white
points
ante
substantial
majority
jury
convinced
us
cases
opinion
applies
also
apodaca
et
al
oregon
post
justice
powell
concurring
concurring
judgment
concur
judgment
convictions
based
jury
verdicts
cases
deprive
criminal
defendants
due
process
law
fourteenth
amendment
reasons
reaching
conclusion
oregon
case
differ
expressed
plurality
opinion
justice
white
state
views
separately
destefano
woods
oregon
petitioner
sought
raise
question
left
open
duncan
whether
right
jury
trial
state
also
contemplates
right
unanimous
verdict
concluded
duncan
retroactive
applicability
found
unnecessary
decide
whether
fourteenth
amendment
requires
unanimity
trial
case
time
occurred
several
years
prior
may
date
decision
duncan
louisiana
case
us
petitioner
also
convicted
verdict
duncan
decided
accordingly
read
destefano
foreclosing
consideration
case
question
whether
jury
trial
guaranteed
due
process
clause
contemplates
corollary
requirement
judgment
unanimous
indeed
johnson
louisiana
appellant
concedes
nonretroactivity
duncan
prevents
raising
due
process
argument
classic
fundamental
fairness
language
adopted
instead
claims
deprived
due
process
conviction
nine
jurors
joined
one
premised
finding
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
held
requisite
element
due
process
winship
reasons
stated
majority
opinion
agree
louisiana
verdict
rule
undercuts
applicable
standard
proof
criminal
prosecutions
state
appellant
also
asks
find
violation
equal
protection
clause
louisiana
constitutional
statutory
provisions
establishing
contours
jury
trial
right
state
challenged
provisions
divide
accused
crimes
three
categories
depending
severity
possible
punishment
charged
offenses
punishment
might
hard
labor
entitled
unanimous
verdict
charged
offenses
punishment
necessarily
hard
labor
entitled
verdict
nine
jurors
must
concur
charged
capital
offenses
entitled
unanimous
verdict
la
art
vii
la
code
crim
art
distinctions
classes
defendants
constitute
invidious
discrimination
one
classes
unless
state
classification
said
lack
reasonable
rational
basis
shown
reason
question
rationality
louisiana
system
therefore
join
opinion
johnson
louisiana
affirming
decision
ii
neither
logic
history
intent
draftsmen
fourteenth
amendment
possibly
said
require
sixth
amendment
jury
trial
provision
applied
together
total
gloss
decisions
supplied
fourteenth
amendment
rather
sixth
imposes
upon
requirement
provide
jury
trials
accused
serious
crimes
said
cases
decided
intendment
amendment
clouded
passage
time
due
process
require
apply
federal
right
gloss
maxwell
dow
justice
peckham
speaking
eight
nine
members
stated
hen
providing
constitution
legislation
manner
civil
criminal
actions
shall
tried
entire
conformity
character
federal
government
right
decide
shall
form
character
procedure
trials
whether
shall
jury
twelve
lesser
number
whether
verdict
must
unanimous
true
course
maxwell
jordan
courts
went
concluded
might
dispense
jury
trial
altogether
conclusion
grounded
limited
view
due
process
accepted
recent
years
rejected
duncan
find
nothing
constitutional
principle
upon
duncan
based
precedents
requires
repudiation
views
expressed
maxwell
jordan
respect
size
jury
unanimity
verdict
justice
fortas
concurring
duncan
commented
distinction
requirements
sixth
amendment
due
process
clause
suggested
appropriate
framework
analysis
issue
case
see
reason
whatever
assume
decision
today
require
us
impose
federal
requirements
unanimous
verdicts
jury
upon
may
well
conclude
features
federal
jury
practice
means
fundamental
essential
due
process
law
obligatory
duncan
louisiana
importance
system
attaches
trial
jury
derives
special
confidence
repose
body
one
peers
determine
guilt
innocence
safeguard
arbitrary
law
enforcement
williams
florida
safeguarding
function
preferring
commonsense
judgment
jury
bulwark
corrupt
overzealous
prosecutor
compliant
biased
eccentric
judge
lies
core
dedication
principles
jury
determination
guilt
innocence
fundamental
jury
trial
brings
within
mandate
due
process
seems
fundamental
adequately
preserved
provision
oregon
constitution
reason
believe
basis
experience
oregon
elsewhere
unanimous
decision
jurors
likely
serve
high
purpose
jury
trial
entitled
greater
respect
community
decision
joined
members
jury
standard
due
process
assured
oregon
constitution
provides
sufficient
guarantee
government
permitted
impose
judgment
accused
without
first
meeting
full
burden
prosecutorial
duty
moreover
holding
fourteenth
amendment
incorporated
every
element
sixth
amendment
derogates
principles
federalism
basic
system
name
uniform
application
high
standards
due
process
embarked
upon
course
constitutional
interpretation
deprives
freedom
experiment
adjudicatory
processes
different
federal
model
time
understandable
unwillingness
impose
requirements
finds
unnecessarily
rigid
williams
florida
culminated
dilution
federal
rights
decisions
never
seriously
questioned
doubly
undesirable
consequence
reasoning
process
labeled
justice
harlan
constitutional
schizophrenia
may
well
detrimental
state
federal
criminal
justice
systems
although
perhaps
late
day
expression
views
accord
opinions
similar
cases
chief
justice
justices
harlan
stewart
fortas
least
defining
elements
right
jury
trial
sound
basis
interpreting
fourteenth
amendment
require
blind
adherence
details
federal
sixth
amendment
standards
civil
war
amendments
altered
substantially
balance
federalism
strains
credulity
believe
intended
deprive
freedom
experiment
variations
procedure
age
empirical
study
increasingly
relied
upon
foundation
decisionmaking
one
obvious
merits
federal
system
opportunity
affords
state
people
choose
become
laboratory
experiment
range
trial
procedural
alternatives
although
need
innovations
grow
diversity
always
great
imagination
unimpeded
unwarranted
demands
national
uniformity
special
importance
time
serious
doubt
exists
adequacy
criminal
justice
system
diversity
local
legislative
responsiveness
marked
development
economic
social
reforms
country
barred
unduly
restrictive
application
due
process
clause
might
well
lead
valuable
innovations
respect
determining
fairly
expeditiously
guilt
innocence
accused
viewing
unanimity
controversy
one
requiring
fresh
look
question
fundamental
jury
trial
see
constitutional
infirmity
provision
adopted
people
oregon
product
constitutional
amendment
approved
vote
people
state
appears
patterned
provision
american
law
institute
code
criminal
procedure
similar
decision
echoed
recently
england
unanimity
requirement
abandoned
statutory
enactment
verdict
provisions
also
viewed
approval
american
bar
association
criminal
justice
project
studied
jury
mechanism
recommended
deviation
historic
rule
unanimity
found
number
considerations
significant
removal
unanimity
requirement
well
minimize
potential
hung
juries
occasioned
either
bribery
juror
irrationality
furthermore
rule
juries
must
speak
single
voice
often
leads
full
agreement
among
agreement
none
compromise
despite
frequent
absence
rational
basis
compromise
quite
apart
whether
justices
sitting
deemed
advisable
adoption
particular
jury
provision
think
considerations
kind
reflect
legitimate
basis
experimentation
deviation
federal
blueprint
iii
petitioners
apodaca
oregon
addition
primary
contention
unanimity
requirement
state
jury
trials
fourteenth
amendment
incorporates
sixth
also
assert
oregon
constitutional
provision
offends
federal
constitutional
guarantee
systematic
exclusion
group
within
citizenry
participating
criminal
trial
process
systematic
exclusion
identifiable
minorities
jury
service
long
recognized
violation
equal
protection
clause
see
whitus
georgia
strauder
west
virginia
recent
years
held
criminal
defendants
entitled
matter
due
process
jury
drawn
representative
cross
section
community
essential
element
fair
impartial
jury
trial
see
williams
florida
alexander
louisiana
douglas
concurring
petitioners
contend
jury
verdict
provisions
undercut
right
implicitly
permitting
jury
room
prohibited
jury
venire
selection
process
exclusion
minority
group
viewpoints
argue
unless
unanimity
required
even
properly
drawn
jury
result
whether
conviction
acquittal
may
unjust
product
racism
bigotry
emotionally
inflamed
trial
fears
materialize
jury
majority
responding
extraneous
pressures
ignores
evidence
instructions
well
rational
arguments
minority
risk
however
jury
particular
case
fail
meet
high
responsibility
inherent
system
commits
decisions
guilt
innocence
untrained
laymen
drawn
random
community
part
least
rule
must
rely
principle
underlies
historic
dedication
jury
trial
systems
premised
conviction
juror
faithfully
perform
assigned
duty
justice
douglas
dissent
today
appears
rest
contrary
assumption
members
jury
constituting
majority
duty
consider
minority
viewpoint
course
deliberation
characterizing
jury
consideration
minority
views
mere
polite
academic
conversation
courtesy
dialogue
concludes
jury
obligation
oregon
deliberate
jurors
vote
together
outset
post
power
freely
shut
competing
views
implied
record
case
contrary
basic
principles
jury
participation
criminal
process
may
course
reasonable
differences
opinion
merit
speculative
concerns
expressed
petitioners
reflected
dissenting
opinion
find
nothing
oregon
experience
justify
apprehension
juries
bound
unanimity
rule
likely
ignore
historic
responsibility
moreover
need
rely
presumption
regularity
vacuum
since
disposal
protective
devices
diminish
significantly
prospect
jury
irresponsibility
even
jury
sworn
substantial
protection
selection
representative
wilfully
irresponsible
jury
assured
wide
availability
peremptory
challenges
challenges
cause
likelihood
miscarriage
justice
diminished
judge
use
full
jury
instructions
detailing
applicable
burdens
proof
informing
jurors
duty
weigh
views
fellow
jurors
reminding
solemn
responsibility
imposed
oaths
trial
judges
also
retain
power
direct
acquittals
cases
evidence
guilt
lacking
set
aside
verdicts
rendered
evidence
insufficient
support
conviction
furthermore
cases
public
emotion
runs
high
pretrial
publicity
threatens
fair
trial
judges
possess
broad
power
grant
changes
venue
impose
restrictions
extent
press
coverage
light
protections
unlikely
oregon
rule
account
increase
number
cases
injustice
occasioned
biased
prejudiced
jury
may
wise
recall
justice
white
admonition
murphy
waterfront
constitution
protects
real
dangers
remote
speculative
possibilities
since
view
oregon
jury
verdict
requirement
violative
due
process
guarantee
fourteenth
amendment
concur
affirmance
convictions
right
course
reserved
crimes
may
deemed
serious
see
bloom
illinois
baldwin
new
york
contention
raised
carcerano
gladden
consolidated
disposed
along
destefano
opinion
addition
jury
trial
issues
case
also
join
part
iv
opinion
insofar
concludes
lineup
identification
fruit
prior
warrantless
arrest
wong
sun
circumstances
case
find
unnecessary
reach
question
whether
appellant
warrantless
arrest
constitutionally
invalid
jury
trial
federal
cases
also
assured
art
iii
constitution
trial
crimes
shall
jury
see
also
justice
white
opinion
swain
alabama
stating
dictum
alabama
adheres
system
trial
impartial
jury
men
must
unanimously
agree
verdict
system
followed
federal
courts
virtue
sixth
amendment
emphasis
supplied
result
attained
respect
right
jury
trial
civil
cases
seventh
amendment
see
american
publishing
fisher
springville
thomas
process
determining
content
sixth
amendment
right
jury
trial
long
one
careful
evaluation
strict
adherence
limitations
right
known
criminal
trials
common
law
see
williams
florida
separate
opinion
harlan
recent
example
process
constitutional
adjudication
may
found
part
ii
opinion
duncan
louisiana
petty
offenses
excluded
rule
requiring
jury
trial
offenses
tried
without
juries
england
colonies
found
substantial
evidence
framers
intended
depart
established
practice
effect
see
justice
harlan
dissent
baldwin
new
york
appearing
williams
florida
also
representative
historical
approach
sixth
amendment
exhaustive
majority
dissenting
opinions
sparf
ultimately
concluded
federal
criminal
juries
empowered
decide
questions
fact
rather
attempting
determine
whether
distinction
desirable
whether
might
essential
function
performed
juries
decision
premised
conclusion
english
colonial
juries
right
decide
questions
law
historical
approach
accounts
numerous
opinions
see
text
accompanying
finding
unanimity
one
attributes
subsumed
term
jury
trial
reason
conference
committee
revision
house
draft
sixth
amendment
offered
justify
departure
prior
precedents
admitted
ambiguity
piece
legislative
history
sufficient
view
override
unambiguous
history
right
williams
florida
see
perry
sources
liberties
story
commentaries
constitution
ed
see
blackstone
commentaries
forsyth
history
trial
jury
hale
analysis
law
england
agree
justice
white
analysis
duncan
departure
earlier
decisions
large
measure
product
change
focus
approach
due
process
longer
questions
regarding
constitutionality
particular
criminal
procedures
resolved
focusing
alone
element
question
ascertaining
whether
system
criminal
justice
might
imagined
fair
trial
afforded
absence
particular
element
rather
focus
fundamentality
element
viewed
context
basic
jurisprudential
system
common
duncan
louisiana
supra
approach
due
process
readily
accounts
conclusion
jury
trial
fundamental
unanimity
see
part
iii
infra
duncan
louisiana
see
also
baldwin
new
york
indeed
strongly
felt
jury
role
protector
innocence
consequences
partiality
undue
bias
judges
favor
prosecution
earlier
point
country
history
deemed
juries
final
arbiters
questions
arising
criminal
prosecutions
whether
factual
legal
allow
judges
determine
law
considered
pose
great
risk
judicial
oppression
favoring
state
accused
see
state
croteau
howe
juries
judges
criminal
law
harv
rev
historical
preference
jury
decisionmaking
still
reflected
criminal
procedures
two
ind
art
md
art
xv
see
brady
maryland
wyley
warden
cert
denied
beavers
state
ind
available
empirical
research
indicates
protection
substantially
affected
verdict
requirements
kalven
zeisel
frequently
cited
study
american
juries
american
jury
phoenix
ed
note
unanimity
demanded
cases
result
hung
juries
unanimity
required
available
statistics
indicate
juries
still
hung
cases
thus
may
estimated
roughly
oregon
practice
may
result
verdicts
cases
cases
verdict
returned
unanimity
demanded
given
large
number
causes
percentage
disparity
might
attributed
given
possibility
conviction
retrial
impossible
conclude
percentage
represents
convictions
obtained
standards
offensive
due
process
duncan
louisiana
supra
harlan
dissenting
harlan
dissenting
bloom
illinois
fortas
concurring
baldwin
new
york
burger
dissenting
williams
florida
separate
opinions
harlan
stewart
cf
justice
douglas
concurring
opinion
alexander
louisiana
unwillingness
accept
incorporationist
notion
jury
trial
must
applied
total
uniformity
require
take
issue
every
precedent
applying
various
criminal
procedural
rights
force
applied
federal
courts
see
justice
fortas
opinion
bloom
illinois
also
applied
duncan
see
justice
brandeis
dissent
new
state
ice
liebmann
details
stultifying
potential
substantive
due
process
doctrine
ali
code
criminal
procedure
criminal
justice
act
great
britain
american
bar
association
project
standards
criminal
justice
trial
jury
approved
draft
see
also
commentary
see
kalven
zeisel
american
jury
notes
english
controversy
chi
rec
samuels
criminal
justice
act
mod
rev
comment
waiver
jury
unanimity
doubts
reasonable
doubt
chi
rev
comment
jury
verdicts
unanimous
criminal
cases
rev
see
state
gann
approval
oregon
requirement
compel
acceptance
alternatives
due
process
mandate
basic
fairness
often
require
drawing
difficult
lines
see
francis
resweber
frankfurter
concurring
full
recognition
function
performed
jury
trials
coupled
due
respect
presumptive
validity
state
laws
based
rational
considerations
mentioned
assist
finding
required
balance
question
presented
different
context
see
swain
alabama
allen
see
irvin
dowd
see
sheppard
maxwell
estes
texas
justice
douglas
justice
brennan
justice
marshall
concur
dissenting
appellant
louisiana
case
petitioners
oregon
case
convicted
juries
less
unanimous
procedure
authorized
louisiana
oregon
constitutions
claim
rejected
majority
procedure
violation
federal
constitutional
rights
due
respect
majority
dissent
radical
departure
american
traditions
constitution
mention
unanimous
juries
neither
mention
presumption
innocence
say
guilt
must
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
criminal
cases
yet
almost
inconceivable
anyone
questioned
whether
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
fact
constitutional
standard
indeed
case
finally
arose
little
difficult
disposing
issue
winship
speaking
justice
brennan
stated
use
standard
indispensable
command
respect
confidence
community
applications
criminal
law
critical
moral
force
criminal
law
diluted
standard
proof
leaves
people
doubt
whether
innocent
men
condemned
also
important
free
society
every
individual
going
ordinary
affairs
confidence
government
adjudge
guilty
criminal
offense
without
convincing
proper
factfinder
guilt
utmost
certainty
lest
remain
doubt
constitutional
stature
standard
explicitly
hold
due
process
clause
protects
accused
conviction
except
upon
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
every
fact
necessary
constitute
crime
charged
ibid
result
today
decisions
anomalous
though
unanimous
jury
decisions
required
state
trials
constitutionally
required
federal
prosecutions
possible
decisions
stem
sixth
amendment
held
unanimously
bill
rights
requires
unanimous
jury
verdict
unanimity
jury
verdicts
required
sixth
seventh
amendments
apply
criminal
cases
requirement
unanimity
extends
issues
character
degree
crime
guilt
punishment
left
jury
verdict
embodies
single
finding
conclusions
jury
upon
questions
submitted
andres
rule
federal
rules
criminal
procedure
verdict
shall
unanimous
rule
made
concurrence
congress
pursuant
today
unanimous
verdict
required
federal
prosecution
state
prosecution
yet
source
right
case
sixth
amendment
fail
see
reason
maintain
inconsistent
dual
positions
course
advocates
view
duties
imposed
reason
bill
rights
operating
fourteenth
amendment
version
guarantees
held
contrary
malloy
hogan
held
guarantees
first
amendment
gitlow
new
york
supra
cantwell
connecticut
louisiana
ex
rel
gremillion
naacp
prohibition
unreasonable
searches
seizures
fourth
amendment
ker
california
right
counsel
guaranteed
sixth
amendment
gideon
wainwright
supra
enforced
fourteenth
amendment
according
standards
protect
personal
rights
federal
encroachment
coerced
confession
cases
involving
policies
privilege
suggestion
confession
might
considered
coerced
used
federal
state
tribunal
thus
rejected
notion
fourteenth
amendment
applies
subjective
version
individual
guarantees
bill
rights
similarly
confrontation
clause
finally
made
obligatory
justice
black
majority
careful
observe
guarantee
like
right
compelled
enforced
fourteenth
amendment
according
standards
protect
personal
rights
federal
encroachment
pointer
texas
cf
dutton
evans
likewise
applied
double
jeopardy
clause
justice
marshall
wrote
nce
decided
particular
bill
rights
guarantee
fundamental
american
scheme
justice
duncan
louisiana
constitutional
standards
apply
state
federal
governments
benton
maryland
doctrine
coextensive
coverage
followed
holding
speedy
trial
clause
applicable
klopfer
north
carolina
duncan
louisiana
holding
jury
trial
guarantee
binding
state
trials
noted
prohibitions
identical
federal
state
governments
see
also
fortas
concurring
diverged
doctrine
coextensive
coverage
guarantees
brought
within
fourteenth
amendment
aberration
later
rectified
wolf
colorado
held
fourth
amendment
ban
unreasonable
warrantless
searches
enforceable
declined
incorporate
fourth
amendment
exclusionary
rule
weeks
happily
however
gap
partially
closed
elkins
completely
bridged
mapp
ohio
mapp
observed
hesitated
enforce
strictly
federal
government
rights
free
speech
free
press
rights
notice
fair
public
trial
concluded
rule
apply
fourth
amendment
concerned
later
made
clear
standard
obtaining
search
warrant
fourth
fourteenth
amendments
aguilar
texas
standard
reasonableness
fourth
fourteenth
amendments
ker
california
said
however
sixth
amendment
applied
reason
fourteenth
mean
federal
proceedings
due
process
gloss
gloss
gives
power
experiment
explicit
implied
guarantees
bill
rights
justice
holmes
dissenting
truax
corrigan
justice
brandeis
dissenting
new
state
ice
liebmann
thought
allowed
improvise
remedies
social
economic
ills
area
many
thou
shalt
nots
constitution
bill
rights
concerning
property
rights
conspicuous
compensation
clause
fifth
amendment
held
applicable
full
vigor
reason
fourteenth
amendment
chicago
chicago
today
decisions
mean
may
apply
watered
version
compensation
clause
today
decisions
limited
paring
civil
rights
protected
bill
rights
fully
applicable
federal
government
civil
rights
whether
concern
speech
searches
seizures
criminal
prosecutions
bail
cruel
unusual
punishments
extend
course
everyone
cold
reality
touch
mostly
lower
castes
society
refer
course
blacks
chicanos
farmers
agricultural
workers
offbeat
students
victims
ghetto
giving
power
experiment
diluting
civil
rights
long
thought
thou
shalt
nots
constitution
bill
rights
protect
everyone
governmental
intrusion
overreaching
idea
obnoxious
relegated
citizenship
construe
bill
rights
fourteenth
amendment
permit
experiment
basic
rights
people
open
veritable
pandora
box
hate
prejudice
versatile
forces
degrade
constitutional
scheme
however
one
concerns
make
bill
rights
applied
watered
version
charter
guarantees
chief
concern
one
often
expressed
late
justice
black
alarmed
prospect
nine
men
appointed
life
sitting
body
determine
whether
government
gone
far
balancing
done
constitution
bill
rights
written
adopted
determine
say
whether
one
person
another
entitled
free
speech
power
never
granted
ultimate
reach
decisions
let
subject
veto
experiment
rights
guaranteed
bill
rights
construe
sixth
amendment
applicable
precisely
applied
federal
government
ii
plurality
approves
procedure
diminishes
reliability
jury
first
eliminates
circumstances
minority
jurors
rationally
persuaded
entire
jury
acquit
unable
persuade
majority
acquit
nonetheless
convinced
convict
offense
second
permits
prosecutors
oregon
louisiana
enjoy
ratio
substantially
greater
ordinarily
returned
unanimous
juries
diminution
verdict
reliability
flows
fact
nonunanimous
juries
need
debate
deliberate
fully
must
unanimous
juries
soon
requisite
majority
attained
consideration
required
either
oregon
louisiana
even
though
dissident
jurors
might
given
chance
able
convince
majority
persuasion
fact
occasionally
occur
unanimous
requirement
applies
roughly
one
case
ten
minority
eventually
succeeds
reversing
initial
majority
may
cases
special
importance
one
explanation
phenomenon
jurors
often
permitted
take
notes
imperfect
memories
forensic
process
forcing
jurors
defend
conflicting
recollections
conclusions
flushes
many
nuances
otherwise
go
overlooked
collective
effort
piece
together
puzzle
historical
truth
however
cut
short
soon
requisite
majority
reached
oregon
louisiana
indeed
necessary
majority
immediately
obtained
deliberation
required
suggestion
may
happened
verdict
rendered
minutes
apodaca
case
sure
jurisdictions
two
initial
majorities
normally
prevail
end
tenth
time
jury
room
operates
reverse
completely
preliminary
perception
guilt
innocence
extracts
jury
room
automatic
check
hasty
factfinding
relieving
jurors
duty
hear
fully
dissenters
said
evidence
majority
jurors
refuse
listen
dissenters
whose
votes
unneeded
conviction
yet
human
experience
teaches
polite
academic
conversation
substitute
earnest
robust
argument
necessary
reach
unanimity
mentioned
earlier
apodaca
case
whatever
courtesy
dialogue
transpired
lasted
minutes
fail
understand
lift
burden
justifying
radical
departure
accepted
applauded
tradition
instead
demand
defendants
document
empirical
evidence
always
thought
obvious
study
sure
williams
florida
held
state
provide
jury
less
number
criminal
trial
said
experiments
occurred
usually
civil
area
indicate
discernible
difference
results
reached
two
juries
short
neither
currently
available
evidence
theory
suggests
jury
necessarily
advantageous
defendant
jury
composed
fewer
members
rationale
williams
application
williams
requires
change
neither
less
advantageous
either
state
defendant
said
showing
satisfied
since
louisiana
oregon
verdict
result
acquittal
yet
experience
shows
jury
overwhelmingly
favors
moreover
even
initial
majority
wins
dissent
side
ultimate
result
may
nonetheless
reflect
reservations
uncertain
jurors
refer
many
compromise
verdicts
offenses
lesser
sentences
thus
even
though
minority
may
forceful
enough
carry
day
doubts
may
nonetheless
cause
majority
exercise
caution
obviously
however
oregon
louisiana
dissident
jurors
opportunity
full
deliberation
temper
opposing
faction
degree
certainty
guilt
new
rule
also
impact
cases
unanimous
jury
neither
voted
acquit
convict
deadlocked
occurs
time
deadlocked
juries
kalven
zeisel
say
contain
either
one
two
three
dissenters
latter
cases
majorities
favor
prosecution
defendant
thus
eliminating
deadlocks
louisiana
wins
cases
every
loses
obtaining
band
outcomes
substantially
favorable
conviction
ratio
ratio
slightly
less
two
guilty
verdicts
every
acquittal
kalven
zeisel
american
jury
table
eliminating
cases
oregon
even
better
gaining
convictions
every
acquittal
statutes
face
deceptively
appear
neutral
use
nonunanimous
jury
stacks
process
accused
thus
take
one
step
away
accusatorial
system
proud
boast
belief
unanimous
jury
necessary
great
barricade
known
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
maintained
equate
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
requirement
unanimous
jury
analytically
fallacious
since
deadlocked
jury
bar
double
jeopardy
retrial
offense
see
dreyer
illinois
nevertheless
one
necessary
proper
effectuation
compare
mapp
ohio
wolf
colorado
suppose
jury
begins
substantial
minority
process
deliberation
sufficient
number
changes
reach
required
verdict
still
lingering
doubt
verdict
clear
safeguard
unanimity
operates
context
make
far
likely
guilt
established
beyond
reasonable
doubt
late
learned
hand
said
litigant
dread
lawsuit
beyond
almost
anything
else
short
sickness
death
criminal
level
dread
multiplies
person
faced
awesome
power
government
great
jeopardy
even
though
innocent
facts
always
elusive
often
may
appear
one
imply
guilt
may
carry
overtones
another
every
criminal
prosecution
crosses
treacherous
ground
guilt
common
men
yet
guilt
one
may
irrelevant
charge
tried
indicate
penalty
extremely
light
character
risk
loss
liberty
certainty
found
guilty
stigmatized
conviction
factors
emphasized
winship
sustaining
requirement
man
condemned
reasonable
doubt
guilt
therefore
always
held
criminal
cases
err
side
letting
guilty
go
free
rather
sending
innocent
jail
required
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
concrete
substance
presumption
innocence
procedure
required
degree
patience
part
jurors
forcing
deliberate
order
reach
unanimous
verdict
today
price
never
seemed
high
law
order
judicial
mood
causes
barricades
lowered
requirements
unanimous
jury
verdict
criminal
cases
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
embedded
constitutional
law
touch
directly
citizens
important
barricades
liberty
changed
introduced
constitutional
amendment
today
approves
verdict
relax
standard
reasonable
doubt
still
resorting
verdicts
even
majority
rule
moreover
light
today
holdings
williams
florida
future
invalidate
even
convictions
next
step
elimination
presumption
innocence
justice
frankfurter
writing
dissent
leland
oregon
said
unthinkable
failure
bring
guilty
book
heinous
crime
deeply
stirs
popular
sentiment
may
lead
legislature
state
one
emotional
storms
occasion
sweep
people
enact
thereafter
indictment
murder
following
attempted
rape
presumptive
proof
guilt
cast
upon
defendant
burden
proving
beyond
reasonable
doubt
killing
doubt
statute
go
beyond
freedom
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
fashion
penal
codes
procedures
enforcing
time
law
inherited
emerged
dark
barbaric
times
conception
justice
dominated
criminal
law
refused
put
accused
hazard
punishment
fails
remove
every
reasonable
doubt
innocence
minds
jurors
duty
government
establish
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
notion
basic
law
rightly
one
boasts
free
society
requirement
safeguard
due
process
law
historic
procedural
content
due
process
accordingly
doubt
repeat
state
cast
upon
accused
duty
establishing
beyond
reasonable
doubt
act
caused
death
another
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
unanimity
criminal
verdicts
presumption
innocence
basic
features
accusatorial
system
today
tradition
tradition
inquisition
amendments
adopted
setting
new
standards
let
man
fined
imprisoned
derogation
today
indisputably
law
land
opinion
applies
also
apodaca
et
al
oregon
post
see
also
story
commentaries
constitution
ed
trial
jury
generally
understood
mean
ex
vitermini
trial
jury
twelve
men
impartially
selected
must
unanimously
concur
guilt
accused
legal
conviction
law
therefore
dispensing
requisites
may
considered
unconstitutional
term
held
jury
six
sufficient
williams
florida
noted
neither
evidence
theory
suggested
favorable
accused
six
said
unanimity
impartial
selection
jurors
see
infra
story
commentaries
cite
statutory
authority
requirement
unanimity
criminal
jury
authority
never
thought
necessary
unanimous
jury
embedded
legal
history
one
question
constitutional
position
thus
never
need
codify
indeed
criminal
case
dealing
unanimous
jury
ever
decided
today
largely
unquestioned
constitutional
assumption
similar
assumption
course
made
respect
seventh
amendment
civil
jury
issue
reach
difficulty
holding
unanimous
jury
constitutional
requirement
american
publishing
fisher
course
unanimous
jury
origin
long
american
revolution
first
recorded
case
requirement
unanimity
anonymous
case
lib
assisarum
reprinted
english
pound
plucknett
readings
history
system
common
law
ed
said
impact
mapp
ohio
federalism
bears
repeating
mapp
established
assumption
supervisory
authority
state
courts
consequently
implied
total
obliteration
state
laws
relating
arrests
searches
favor
federal
law
mapp
sounded
death
knell
federalism
rather
echoed
sentiment
elkins
healthy
federalism
depends
upon
avoidance
needless
conflict
state
federal
courts
urging
cooperation
promoted
recognition
mutual
obligation
respect
fundamental
criteria
approaches
ker
california
kalven
zeisel
american
jury
see
also
american
jury
notes
english
controversy
chi
rec
american
jury
supra
last
vote
deadlocked
juries
vote
conviction
per
cent
number
juries
sample
lectures
legal
topics
association
bar
city
new
york
justice
brennan
justice
marshall
joins
dissenting
readers
today
opinions
may
understandably
puzzled
convictions
jury
votes
affirmed
majority
agrees
sixth
amendment
requires
unanimous
verdict
federal
criminal
jury
trials
majority
also
agrees
right
jury
trial
guaranteed
sixth
amendment
enforced
according
standards
protect
right
federal
encroachment
reason
brother
powell
agrees
unanimous
verdict
required
federal
criminal
trials
agree
sixth
amendment
right
jury
trial
applied
way
state
federal
governments
circumstance
arguable
affirmance
convictions
apodaca
madden
cooper
inconsistent
view
today
decision
holding
unanimous
verdict
afford
accused
state
criminal
prosecution
jury
trial
guaranteed
sixth
amendment
event
affirmance
must
obscure
majority
remains
view
case
every
specific
bill
rights
extends
fn
sixth
amendment
jury
trial
guarantee
however
construed
identical
application
state
federal
governments
add
words
opinions
brothers
douglas
stewart
marshall
joined
emotions
may
run
high
criminal
trials
although
fairly
demand
jurors
neutral
begun
hear
evidence
surpass
power
command
remain
unmoved
evidence
unfolds
means
jurors
often
enter
jury
deliberations
strong
opinions
merits
case
time
sufficient
majority
available
reach
verdict
jurors
majority
nothing
common
sense
restrain
returning
verdict
fairly
considered
positions
jurors
reach
different
conclusion
even
giving
reasonable
leeway
legislative
judgment
matters
think
simply
ignores
reality
imagine
jurors
circumstances
even
fairly
weigh
arguments
opposing
position
context
must
view
constitutional
requirement
juries
drawn
accurate
cross
section
community
verdicts
must
unanimous
member
jury
may
ignored
others
less
unanimity
sufficient
consideration
minority
views
may
become
nothing
matter
majority
grace
opinion
right
groups
nation
participate
criminal
process
means
right
voices
heard
unanimous
verdict
vindicates
right
majority
verdicts
destroy
opinion
applies
also
apodaca
oregon
post
fn
see
example
first
amendment
gitlow
new
york
cantwell
connecticut
louisiana
ex
rel
gremillion
naacp
fourth
amendment
ker
california
fifth
amendment
privilege
malloy
hogan
fifth
amendment
double
jeopardy
clause
benton
maryland
fifth
amendment
compensation
clause
chicago
chicago
sixth
amendment
speedy
trial
clause
klopfer
north
carolina
sixth
amendment
guarantee
jury
trial
duncan
louisiana
sixth
amendment
confrontation
clause
pointer
texas
justice
stewart
justice
brennan
justice
marshall
join
dissenting
case
tried
announcement
decision
duncan
louisiana
therefore
unlike
apodaca
oregon
decided
today
post
sixth
amendment
guarantee
trial
jury
applicable
destefano
woods
think
fourteenth
amendment
alone
clearly
requires
state
purports
accord
right
trial
jury
criminal
case
unanimous
jury
return
constitutionally
valid
verdict
guarantee
systematic
discrimination
selection
criminal
juries
fundamental
fourteenth
amendment
insistent
message
line
decisions
extending
nearly
century
carter
jury
whitus
georgia
hernandez
texas
patton
mississippi
norris
alabama
carter
texas
strauder
west
virginia
clear
purpose
decisions
ensure
universal
participation
citizenry
administration
criminal
justice
yet
today
judgment
approves
elimination
one
rule
ensure
participation
meaningful
rule
requiring
assent
jurors
verdict
conviction
acquittal
returned
today
judgment
nine
jurors
simply
ignore
views
fellow
panel
members
different
race
class
constitutional
guarantee
impartial
system
jury
selection
state
criminal
trial
rests
due
process
equal
protection
clauses
fourteenth
amendment
see
whitus
georgia
supra
carter
texas
supra
strauder
west
virginia
supra
jury
selected
assure
fair
criminal
trial
see
public
confidence
result
cf
witherspoon
illinois
winship
today
decision
grossly
undermines
basic
assurances
unanimous
jury
selected
serve
minimize
potential
bigotry
might
convict
inadequate
evidence
acquit
evidence
guilt
clear
see
strauder
west
virginia
supra
community
confidence
administration
criminal
justice
corroded
system
defendant
conspicuously
identified
particular
group
acquitted
convicted
jury
split
along
group
lines
requirements
unanimity
impartial
selection
thus
complement
ensuring
fair
performance
vital
functions
criminal
jury
denigrate
system
trial
jury
acknowledge
imperfect
ennoble
system
drape
upon
jury
majority
mantle
presumptive
reasonableness
circumstances
never
impervious
reality
area
recognition
serious
risks
jury
misbehavior
theme
unifying
series
constitutional
decisions
may
jeopardy
today
facile
presumption
regularity
becomes
new
point
departure
juries
sometimes
act
passion
prejudice
constitution
require
availability
change
venue
cf
groppi
wisconsin
irvin
dowd
strauder
west
virginia
supra
juries
sometimes
act
improperly
constitution
require
protection
inflammatory
press
coverage
ex
parte
influence
officers
sheppard
maxwell
parker
gladden
turner
louisiana
juries
must
presumed
obey
instructions
bench
constitution
require
certain
information
must
go
jury
matter
strong
cautionary
charge
accompanies
bruton
jackson
denno
indeed
insist
man
constitutionally
convicted
jury
members
identifiable
group
belongs
systematically
excluded
hernandez
texas
deeply
engrained
law
tradition
refusal
engage
review
jury
deliberations
however
safeguards
provide
limited
protection
requirement
verdict
jury
unanimous
surely
important
constitutional
requisites
preserves
jury
function
linking
law
contemporary
society
provides
simple
effective
method
endorsed
centuries
experience
history
combat
injuries
fair
administration
justice
inflicted
community
passion
prejudice
dissent
notwithstanding
justice
blackmun
disclaimer
nothing
reasoning
opinion
stop
approving
verdicts
even
justice
marshall
justice
brennan
joins
dissenting
today
cuts
heart
two
important
inseparable
safeguards
bill
rights
offers
criminal
defendant
right
submit
case
jury
right
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
together
safeguards
occupy
fundamental
place
constitutional
scheme
protecting
individual
defendant
awesome
power
state
today
skeleton
safeguards
remains
strips
life
meaning
refrain
adding
protest
brothers
douglas
brennan
stewart
join
apodaca
oregon
question
frighteningly
simple
bear
much
discussion
asked
decide
nature
jury
guaranteed
sixth
amendment
thought
history
provided
appropriate
guide
justice
powell
demonstrated
convincingly
history
compels
decision
unanimity
essential
feature
jury
majority
embarked
functional
analysis
jury
allows
strip
away
one
one
virtually
characteristic
features
jury
know
two
years
ago
dissent
discarded
essential
feature
traditional
size
jury
williams
florida
today
discards
least
state
trials
traditional
requirement
unanimity
seems
utterly
ominously
clear
long
tribunal
bears
label
jury
meet
sixth
amendment
requirements
presently
viewed
seems
require
jurors
laymen
drawn
community
without
systematic
exclusion
group
exercise
commonsense
judgment
distressing
still
treatment
right
jury
trial
cavalier
treatment
gives
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
asserts
jury
votes
nine
three
conviction
doubts
three
impeach
verdict
nine
argument
seems
since
williams
nine
jurors
enough
convict
three
dissenters
mere
surplusage
difference
world
three
jurors
three
jurors
entertain
doubts
hearing
evidence
first
case
never
know
senseless
ask
whether
prosecutor
might
persuaded
additional
jurors
present
second
case
know
happened
prosecutor
tried
failed
persuade
jurors
defendant
guilt
circumstances
violence
language
logic
say
government
proved
defendant
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
said
argument
fallacious
deadlocked
jury
law
bring
acquittal
bar
retrial
argument
seems
doubt
dissenting
juror
reasonable
doubt
constitutionally
bars
conviction
necessarily
result
acquittal
bar
retrial
argument
rests
complete
non
sequitur
rule
properly
viewed
simply
establishes
prerequisite
obtaining
valid
conviction
prosecutor
must
overcome
jury
reasonable
doubts
determine
shall
happen
fails
question
answered
reference
wholly
different
constitutional
provision
fifth
amendment
ban
double
jeopardy
made
applicable
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
benton
maryland
prevailing
notions
double
jeopardy
jury
tried
failed
reach
unanimous
verdict
new
trial
may
held
perez
wheat
state
free
consistent
ban
double
jeopardy
treat
verdict
nonunanimous
jury
nullity
rather
acquittal
retrial
prosecutor
may
given
opportunity
make
stronger
case
new
evidence
may
available
old
evidence
may
disappeared
even
evidence
may
appear
different
light
example
demeanor
witnesses
different
second
trial
may
vary
substantially
first
doubts
dissenting
jurors
first
trial
necessarily
impeach
verdict
new
jury
retrial
conclusion
wholly
consistent
view
doubts
dissenting
jurors
create
constitutional
bar
conviction
trial
produced
doubts
today
thought
law
respectfully
reject
suggestion
brother
powell
doubts
minority
jurors
may
attributable
irrationality
protection
needed
jury
selected
properly
every
juror
competent
rational
person
irrationality
enters
deliberation
process
precisely
essence
right
jury
trial
time
approved
change
familiar
characteristics
jury
reaffirmed
principle
fundamental
characteristic
capacity
render
commonsense
layman
judgment
representative
body
drawn
community
fence
dissenting
juror
fences
voice
community
undermines
principle
whole
notion
jury
rests
dissenting
brothers
pointed
danger
rule
excluding
process
members
minority
groups
whose
participation
elsewhere
recognized
constitutional
requirement
emphasized
however
problem
goes
beyond
problem
identifiable
minority
groups
juror
whose
dissenting
voice
unheard
may
spokesman
minority
viewpoint
simply
view
enough
doubts
single
juror
view
evidence
government
failed
carry
burden
proving
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
dissent
opinion
applies
also
apodaca
oregon
post