Palko v. Connecticut 1937

• Author: Daniel Brannen, Richard Hanes, Elizabeth Shaw
• Pages: 310-313

Contenidos

• Murder.
• Fundamental Justice.
• Impact.
• Suggestions for further reading.

Page 310

Appellant: Frank Palko

Appellee: State of Connecticut

Appellant's Claim: That when Connecticut tried him a second time for murder, it violated the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Chief Lawyers for Appellant: David Goldstein and George A. Saden

Chief Lawyer for Appellee: William H. Comley

Justices for the Court: Hugo Lafayette Black, Louis D. Brandeis, Benjamin N. Cardozo, Charles Evans Hughes, James Clark McReynolds, Owen Josephus Roberts, Harlan Fiske Stone, George Sutherland

Justices Dissenting: Pierce Butler

Date of Decision: December 6, 1937

Decision: The Supreme Court affirmed Palko's second conviction for murder.

Significance: With Palko, the Supreme Court said the Bill of Rights does not automatically apply to the states. It took many cases over the next few decades for the Court to reverse this decision and apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states.

Page 311

The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution says no person "shall . . . be twice put in jeopardy of life and limb" for the same crime. This is called the Double Jeopardy Clause. It prevents the federal government from trying or punishing a person twice for the same crime.

Associate Justice Benjamin N. Cardozo. Courtesy of the Supreme Court of the United States.

The Fifth Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, which contains the first ten amendment to the Constitution. The United States adopted the Bill of Rights in 1791 to give American citizens rights against the federal government. State and local governments did not have to obey the Bill of Rights.

In 1868, after the American Civil War, the United States adopted the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment contains a phrase called the Due Process Clause. It says states may not "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Ever since 1868, the Supreme Court has struggled to define what is meant by "due process of law." In Palko v. Connecticut (1937), the Supreme Court had to decide whether "due process of law" means states must obey the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Murder

Frank Palko was charged with first degree murder in Fairfield County, Connecticut, where he could get the death penalty. The jury found Palko guilty of second degree murder, a lesser crime that was punishable only

Page 312

with imprisonment. The court sentenced Palko to...