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

1963 Duke L.J. 555 (1963)
Constitutional Law: Due Process as Ground for Refusing to Testify before Congressional Investigating Committee--A Novel Approach Rejected

handle is hein.journals/duklr1963 and id is 573 raw text is: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: DUE PROCESS AS GROUND FOR REFUSING TO TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE-A NOVEL APPROACH REJECTED THE expanding role of congressional investigating committees has raised constitutional questions as to the rights of witnesses who appear before such bodies under compulsory process. In a recent case of first impression, Hutcheson v. United States,1 the United States Supreme Court considered the efficacy of the due process clause of the fifth amendment as a ground for a witness' refusal to answer questions propounded by an investigating committee. Petitioner, President of the Carpenters Union,2 was subpoenaed by the McClellan Committee3 and asked whether union funds had been used to fix an Indiana grand jury investigation of a scheme by petitioner and others to defraud the state. At the time of his appearance before the committee, petitioner was under indictment in an Indiana court for bribing a state official in furtherance of the scheme. He refused to answer the committee's questions concern- ing the alleged fix, solely on the ground that the questions related to the state prosecution and thus were in denial of due process of law. Petitioner was thereafter indicted for contempt of Congress and convicted in a federal district court.4 The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed, without opinion.5 Certiorari ' 369 U.S. 599 (1962). 2 United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America. -'The committee is properly known as the Select Senate Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor or Management Field. It was established pursuant to S. RES. '74, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957), to investigate the extent to which criminal practices had been carried on in the labor-management field, and to determine whether any changes were required in the laws of the United States to protect against such prac- tices. Following an investigative pattern which had disclosed misuse of union funds for the personal benefit of union officials, the committee, on June 27, 1958, sought to in- quire into the personal financial interests of petitioner and various other officials of the Carpenters Union. I After a trial without a jury, petitioner was found guilty of having violated 2 U.S.C. § 192 (1958), which provides: Every person who having been summoned as a witness . . . refuses to answer any question pertinent to the question under inquiry, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor .... . Petitioner was sentenced to six months' imprisonment and ordered to pay a fine of $500. The District Court did not render a written opinion. Hutcheson v. United States, 285 F.2d 280 (D.C. Cir. 1960), aff'd 369 U.S. 599 (1962).

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