Garland v. Washington
232 U.S. 642 (1914)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Garland v. Washington, 232 U.S. 642 (1914)

Garland v. Washington

No. 226

Submitted January 29, 1914

Decided March 16, 1914

232 U.S. 642

Syllabus

Due process of law does not require the state to adopt any particular form of procedure in criminal trials, so long as the accused has had sufficient notice of the accusation and adequate opportunity to defend. Rogers v. Peck,199 U. S. 425.

The want of a formal arraignment to a second information of the same offense does not deprive the accused of any substantial right, and where the course of the trial, otherwise fair, was not in any manner affected to his prejudice, there is no denial of due process of law.

Technical objections, originating in the early period of English history when the accused was entitled to but few rights, are passing away and should not be allowed as to unimportant formalities where the rights of the accused have not been prejudiced.

This Court is reluctant to overrule its former decisions, and it only does so in this case because it appears that the right sustained in a former case involving criminal procedure is no longer required for the protection of the accused. Crain v. United States,162 U. S. 625, overruled so far as not in accord herewith.

65 Wash. 666 affirmed.

The facts, which involve the validity, under the due process provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment, of a conviction and sentence, are stated in the opinion.

Page 232 U. S. 643

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.