GILBERT v. CALIFORNIA, 384 U.S. 985 (1966)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
GILBERT v. CALIFORNIA , 384 U.S. 985 (1966)384 U.S. 985
Jesse James GILBERT, petitioner,
v.
CALIFORNIA.
No. 1600, Misc.
June 13, 1966.
Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California granted limited to Questions 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the petition which read as follows:
'2. Whether a criminal defendant's
constitutional right to due process of law and his guarantee
against self-incrimination were violated where the conviction of
petitioner Gilbert was based substantially upon the out-of-court
declaration of his co-defendant King which recited Gilbert's
participation in robbery, kidnapping and murder and King's in court
confession which the California Court has ruled as a matter of
state law was impelled by the wrongful admission of King's hearsay
statements?
'3. Whether a criminal defendant's
constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizure
was violated where a conviction was had upon a capital offense and
sentence of death was rendered upon eyewitness identification that
was based, in whole or in part, upon a viewing by such witnesses of
four protographs that were seized by the F.B.I. from petitioner's
locked private apartment without either an arrest or search warrant
at a time when an arrest had not been made and could not be made,
all contrary to the fair administration of criminal justice and due
process provisions of the United States Constitution?
'4. Whether a criminal defendant's
constitutional right to counsel was violated where he was convicted
of a capital offense and sentenced to death upon eyewitness
testimony that was based, in whole or in part, upon a viewing by
such witnesses of unlawfully sized photographs prior to their
attendance at a police line-up where petitioner was compelled to
appear, without notice, and his attorney was not given opportunity
to be present, all
contrary to the fair administration of criminal justice and due process provisions of the United States Constitution?
'5. Whether a criminal defendant's
constitutional right to the assistance of counsel was violated
where following his arrest by the Federal Bureau of Investigation
he demanded the protections afforded by presence of counsel and,
that same evening, an F.B.I. agent took handwriting exemplars from
him that were subsequently used against him at trial of a capital
offense, all contrary to the fair administration of criminal
justice and due process provisions of the United States
Constitution?'
Case transferred to the appellate docket.
Opinions
v.
CALIFORNIA.
No. 1600, Misc. June 13, 1966. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California granted limited to Questions 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the petition which read as follows:
U.S. Supreme Court
GILBERT v. CALIFORNIA , 384 U.S. 985 (1966) 384 U.S. 985 Jesse James GILBERT, petitioner,v.
CALIFORNIA.
No. 1600, Misc. June 13, 1966. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California granted limited to Questions 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the petition which read as follows:
'2. Whether a criminal defendant's
constitutional right to due process of law and his guarantee
against self-incrimination were violated where the conviction of
petitioner Gilbert was based substantially upon the out-of-court
declaration of his co-defendant King which recited Gilbert's
participation in robbery, kidnapping and murder and King's in court
confession which the California Court has ruled as a matter of
state law was impelled by the wrongful admission of King's hearsay
statements?
'3. Whether a criminal defendant's
constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizure
was violated where a conviction was had upon a capital offense and
sentence of death was rendered upon eyewitness identification that
was based, in whole or in part, upon a viewing by such witnesses of
four protographs that were seized by the F.B.I. from petitioner's
locked private apartment without either an arrest or search warrant
at a time when an arrest had not been made and could not be made,
all contrary to the fair administration of criminal justice and due
process provisions of the United States Constitution?
'4. Whether a criminal defendant's
constitutional right to counsel was violated where he was convicted
of a capital offense and sentenced to death upon eyewitness
testimony that was based, in whole or in part, upon a viewing by
such witnesses of unlawfully sized photographs prior to their
attendance at a police line-up where petitioner was compelled to
appear, without notice, and his attorney was not given opportunity
to be present, all
Page 384 U.S. 985 , 986 contrary to the fair administration of criminal justice and due process provisions of the United States Constitution?
Page 384 U.S. 985 , 986 contrary to the fair administration of criminal justice and due process provisions of the United States Constitution?
'5. Whether a criminal defendant's
constitutional right to the assistance of counsel was violated
where following his arrest by the Federal Bureau of Investigation
he demanded the protections afforded by presence of counsel and,
that same evening, an F.B.I. agent took handwriting exemplars from
him that were subsequently used against him at trial of a capital
offense, all contrary to the fair administration of criminal
justice and due process provisions of the United States
Constitution?'
Case transferred to the appellate docket.
Search This Case
