MORFORD
v.
UNITED STATES

U.S. | 1950-04-10
No. 236
Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Frankfurter concur in the reversal for the reasons expressed in their opinions in Dennis v. United States, ante, p. 162., Mr. Justice Clark took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
339 U.S. 258 Supreme Court of the United States (1950) Negative Treatment
Also reported at: 94 L. Ed. 815 · 70 S. Ct. 586 · 1950 U.S. LEXIS 2128 · SCDB 1949-062
Cited by 63 cases
Topics
Actual Bias Voir Dire Examination Impartial Jury

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Actual Bias cases and more on FLexlaw

Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

In this case the trial court did not permit counsel for petitioner to interrogate prospective government employee jurors upon voir dire examination with specific reference to the possible influence of the “Loyalty Order,” Executive Order No. 9835, on their ability to render a just and impartial verdict. Such questioning was permitted in Dennis v. United States, ante, p. 162; see n. 4 of the Court’s opinion, ante, pp. 170-171.

We said in Dennis that “Preservation of the opportunity to prove actual bias is a guarantee of a defendant’s right to an impartial jury.” Ante, pp. 171-172. Since that opportunity was denied in this case, the petition for writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed.

Reversed.

Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Frankfurter concur in the reversal for the reasons expressed in their opinions in Dennis v. United States, ante, p. 162.

Concurrence
Mr. Justice Douglas

Mr. Justice Douglas concurs in the reversal of the judgment. Since, however, counsel requested that all government employees be excluded from the jury in these cases, he thinks the request should have been granted for the reasons stated by the dissenting Justices in Frazier v. United States, 335 U. S. 497, and in Dennis v. United States, ante, p. 162.

Mr. Justice Clark took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By (17 total)

  • HAM v. South Carolina, 409 U.S. 524 (U.S. 1973)
    …al verdict. It is unsurprising, then, that this Court has invalidated decisions reached by juries with a wide variety of different prejudices. See, e. g., Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U. S. 510 (1968); Irvin v. Dowd, supra; Morford v. United States, 339 U. S. 258 (1950). Moreover, the Court has also held that the right to an impartial jury carries with it the concomitant right to take reasonable steps designed to insure that the jury is impartial. A variety of techniques is available to serve this end, see…
    1 / 2
  • United States v. Dennis, 183 F.2d 201 (2d Cir. 1950)
    …for murdering a white man, general inquiries as to prejudice were not enough; the jurors should have been asked as to race prejudice, as they were asked here, just as they were asked about any prejudice against Communists. Morford v. United States, 339 U.S. 258, 70 S.Ct. 586, was a very special situation. The trial came .up in the District of Columbia and a number of the jurors were government employees. The accused wished' to ask them whether the “Loyalty Order” would make tíiem hesitate to render a verdi…
  • Wagner v. United States, 264 F.2d 524 (9th Cir. 1959)
    …4 (a), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A., and that refusal to accord this right is violative of the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments. Dennis v. United States, 339 U.S. 162, 70 S.Ct. 519, 94 L.Ed. 734, and Morford v. United States, 339 U.S. 258, 70 S.Ct. 586, 94 L.Ed. 815, are cited in support of this contention. The trial court refused to permit counsel for appellants to question prospective jurors directly, but offered to propound any questions suggested by counsel. Numerous questions w…
    1 / 2

Previewing 3 of 17 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw