Malloy v. Hogan

Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1 (1964), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States deemed defendants' Fifth Amendment privilege not to be compelled to be witnesses against themselves was applicable within state courts as well as federal courts, overruling the decision in Twining v. New Jersey (1908). The majority decision holds that the Fourteenth Amendment allows the federal government to enforce the first eight amendments on state governments.

Malloy v. Hogan
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 5, 1964 Decided June 15, 1964
Full case name	Malloy v. Hogan, Sheriff
Citations	378 U.S. 1 (more) 84 S. Ct. 1489; 12 L. Ed. 2d 653
Case history
Prior	150 Conn. 220, 187 A.2d 744 (1963)
Holding
The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits state infringement of the privilege against self-incrimination just as the Fifth Amendment prevents the federal government from denying the privilege. In applying the privilege against self-incrimination, the same standards determine whether an accused's silence is justified regardless of whether it is a federal or state proceeding at which he is called to testify.
Court membership
Chief Justice Earl Warren Associate Justices Hugo Black · William O. Douglas Tom C. Clark · John M. Harlan II William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart Byron White · Arthur Goldberg
Case opinions
Majority	Brennan, joined by Warren, Black, Goldberg, Douglas
Concurrence	Douglas
Dissent	Harlan, joined by Clark
Dissent	White, joined by Stewart
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amends. V, XIV
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings
Twining v. New Jersey (1908)

The test for voluntariness used in the Malloy decision was later abrogated by Arizona v. Fulminante (1991).

Background

Malloy, a petitioner, was sentenced to a year in jail for unlawful gambling. After three months, he was released from jail and put on probation for two years and was asked to testify to a state inquiry into gambling and other criminal activities in which Malloy was involved.

He refused to answer the questions to avoid incriminating himself. The court put him back in jail until he testified.

Question

Is a state witness's Fifth Amendment guarantee against self-incrimination protected by the Fourteenth Amendment?

Decision

In a 5-4 decision, Justice Brennan wrote the majority of the court in support of Malloy. The court noted that "the American judicial system is accusatorial, not inquisitorial" and the Fourteenth Amendment protects a witness against self-incrimination. Therefore, both state and federal officials must "establish guilt by evidence that is free and independent of a suspect's or witnesses' statements."[1][2]

See also

• List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 378

References

1. "Malloy v. Hogan - 378 U.S. 1 (1964)". Oyez: Chicago-Kent College of Law. Retrieved 25 November 2013.
2. "Malloy v. Hogan - 378 U.S. 1 (1964)". Justia: US Supreme Court Center. Retrieved 25 November 2013.

Further reading

• McLauchlan, William P. (1966). Malloy v. Hogan and the Application of a Principle of Justice. Madison: University of Wisconsin (M.A. thesis). OCLC 53790302.

External links

• Text of Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1 (1964) is available from:  Findlaw  Justia  Library of Congress  Oyez (oral argument audio)