Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (decided March 18, 1963): “If you can’t afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you.” (In high school I saw a re-enactment of this case with the actual Mr. Gideon playing himself. One must admit, he was a gutsy guy. I recommend “Gideon’s Trumpet”, by Anthony Lewis.)
The Antelope, 23 U.S. 66 (decided March 18, 1825): Marshall: slave trade is o.k. except when specifically prohibited; here, allows return of Spanish slaves but not those captured on American vessel (which were returned to Africa later)
The Plattsburgh, 23 U.S. 133 (decided March 18, 1825): another case forfeiting a vessel for violation of slave trade restrictions even though not outfitted for journey yet
Tharpe v. Ford, 139 S.Ct. 911 (decided March 18, 2019): Court denies cert of attempted opening of 1991 murder verdict based on racist views of one juror; Sotomayor agrees with denial, which is based on procedural grounds, but laments the procedural roadblocks to hearing such an obviously meritorious claim (somehow this juror candidly discussed his views with lawyers for both sides, and even signed an affidavit — he repeats what Chris Rock said about “black folks v. n*****s” but goes way beyond that — it has to be read to be believed) (Tharpe died of natural causes on death row in January 2020)
Southeastern Productions v. Conrad, 420 U.S. 546 (decided March 18, 1975): “Hair”, the “tribal love-rock musical” (as it was described in my time) could not be banned without procedural safeguards (no unbridled discretion by censor, full and fair hearing, and opportunity for prompt judicial review) (to me the highlights were “Frank Mills” and “Good Morning Starshine”, showing an unashamed, childlike delight in things, unafraid of mockery — it takes courage to be like that, /no sarc)
Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 (decided March 18, 1963): habeas petition can be heard despite failure to abide by state rule requiring exhaustion of state remedies (limited by Wainwright v. Sykes, 1977, which held that failure to abide by state rule that objection was to be made at trial or be waived was independent state ground for denial which precludes federal court intervention)
Young v. Harper, 520 U.S. 143 (decided March 18, 1997): prisoner released on “pre-parole” program (designed to reduce overcrowding in prison) was entitled to due process protections before revoked and sent back to prison (opinion by Thomas on this “narrow question”)
Dalton v. Little Rock Family Planning Services, 516 U.S. 474 (decided March 18, 1996): striking state law prohibiting state funding of abortions “except to save the mother’s life” if combined with federal funds because Medicaid allows also for rape/incest (Hyde Amendment); holding can’t be in perpetuity because in the future federal rule might change
United States v. Gagnon, 470 U.S. 522 (decided March 18, 1985): Defendant was observed drawing sketches of the jury during trial. O.K. to have in-camera hearing with one juror who was concerned about this, attended by other counsel, and artistic defendant waived his right to be present by not invoking that right (did he even know he had that right?). OT, but I giggled out of my theater seat when my girlfriend and I saw this juror-with-a-pen scene in the 1990 film "Ernest Goes to Jail", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8pWEUZKIds — she was looking around and hoping no one would see me, I suppose like Ernest himself, who turns out to be a dead ringer for the real killer!) (or when he goes on a date with a fellow bank employee after being “magnetized” by the floor polisher, https://youtu.be/fp0Ec-yZ0EU)
Burns v. Alcala, 420 U.S. 575 (decided March 18, 1975): AFDC not required to provide benefits to unborn children; “dependent child” under statute obviously meant an individual already born (overruled by Dobbs?)
Comments