About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

55 B.U. L. Rev. 507 (1975)
A Reexamination of the Development of the Reasonable Doubt Rule

handle is hein.journals/bulr55 and id is 515 raw text is: A REEXAMINATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE REASONABLE DOUBT RULE ANTHONY A. MORANO* I. INTRODUCTION Several recent United States Supreme Court decisions have concerned the constitutional implications and proper scope of the reasonable doubt rule-the requirement that the accused's guilt be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In In re Winship,' the Court held that the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment requires that every element of the crime charged be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.2 The Court noted the vital role that the rule has played in the American criminal justice system and concluded that it would be fundamentally unfair to convict, a person on the basis of a lower burden of persuasion3 In Apodaca v. Ore- gon4 and Johnson v. Louisiana,5 the Court was called upon to determine whether conviction upon less than a unanimous verdict violated the reasonable doubt rule. The Court in both cases held that conviction by a substantial majority verdict did not violate the requirement that guilt be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The decisions in these cases relied in part upon the Court's conception of the origin and significance of the reasonable doubt standard. In Win- ship, the Court declared that the reasonable doubt rule dated at least from our early years as a nation.'7 Furthermore, the Court in Winship and in Apodaca recognized that the standard of persuasion applicable to crimi- nal trials had not crystalized into the reasonable doubt formulation until after the adoption of the Constitution. The Court assumed in Winship that, when the rule became firmly established in the American criminal * Professor of Law, University of Toledo College of Law. B.A., Amherst College, 1955; LL.B., Fordham University School of Law, 1961. 397 U.S. 358 (1970). Id. at 364. 3 Id. at 363. 4 406 U.S. 404 (1972). The case involved a challenge to Oregon's practice of permitting ten to two jury verdicts in felony cases. A plurality concluded that the sixth amendment's right to a jury trial does not require unanimity nor proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. at 411-12. Justice Powell concurred in the judgment but objected to the plurality's incorpora- tion theory that made the fourteenth amendment due process requirements coextensive with those of the sixth amendment. Johnson v. Louisiana, 406 U.S. 356, 369-77 (1972) (Powell, J., concurring opinion to Apodaca and Johnson). 5 406 U.S. 356 (1972).Johnson involved a fourteenth amendment due process challenge to Louisiana's nine to three standard for jury verdicts. Appellant Johnson argued specifically that, in order to give substance to the constitutionally mandated reasonable doubt standard, the due process clause should be construed to require unanimous jury verdicts. Id. at 359. The Court held that the jury's failure to return a unanimous verdict did not mean that the state had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. at 362-63. For a discussion of the connection between the reasonable doubt rule and unanimous jury verdicts see generally Morano, Retreat from Unanimity and Reasonable Doubt in Criminal Cases, 1969 U. Toledo L. Rev. 337. Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. at 411-12; Johnson v. Louisiana, 406 U.S. at 362. 397 U.S. at 361. The Court made no effort to support this statement. Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. at 412 n.6; In re Winship, 397 U.S. at 361.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most