|
|
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
|
|
|
<case id="50623" source="Oyez API" schema="simple-legal-case-xml-v1"><name>Giglio v. United States</name><docketNumber>70-29</docketNumber><term>1971</term><court><name>Burger Court (1971-1972)</name><identifier>burger3</identifier><href>https://api.oyez.org/courts/burger3</href></court><parties><firstParty role="Petitioner">John Giglio </firstParty><secondParty role="Respondent">United States</secondParty></parties><dates><date type="argued">1971-10-12</date><date type="decided">1972-02-24</date><date type="granted">1971-03-01</date></dates><citation><volume>405</volume><page>150</page><year>1972</year><href>https://api.oyez.org/case_citation/case_citation/14551</href><justia_url>https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/405/150/</justia_url></citation><jurisdiction>Writ of <i>certiorari</i></jurisdiction><facts><html><p>John Giglio was convicted of passing forged money orders. While his appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit was pending, Giglio’s counsel discovered new evidence. The evidence indicated that the prosecution failed to disclose that it promised a key witness immunity from prosecution in exchange for testimony against Giglio. The district court denied Giglio’s motion for a new trial, finding that the error did not affect the verdict. The Court of Appeals affirmed.</p>
|
|
|
</html><text>John Giglio was convicted of passing forged money orders. While his appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit was pending, Giglio’s counsel discovered new evidence. The evidence indicated that the prosecution failed to disclose that it promised a key witness immunity from prosecution in exchange for testimony against Giglio. The district court denied Giglio’s motion for a new trial, finding that the error did not affect the verdict. The Court of Appeals affirmed.</text></facts><questions /><conclusion><html><p>Yes. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, writing for a unanimous court, reversed the conviction and remanded the case for a new trial. The Supreme Court held that evidence of the agreement was relevant to the witness’ credibility. Because the new evidence affected the witness’ credibility and the prosecution’s case rested almost entirely on this witness’ testimony, the original trial violated due process and entitled Giglio to a new trial. Justice Lewis F. Powell and Justice William H. Rehnquist did not participate.</p>
|
|
|
</html><text>Yes. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, writing for a unanimous court, reversed the conviction and remanded the case for a new trial. The Supreme Court held that evidence of the agreement was relevant to the witness’ credibility. Because the new evidence affected the witness’ credibility and the prosecution’s case rested almost entirely on this witness’ testimony, the original trial violated due process and entitled Giglio to a new trial. Justice Lewis F. Powell and Justice William H. Rehnquist did not participate.</text></conclusion><advocates><advocate for="for petitioner"><name>James M. LaRossa</name><href>https://api.oyez.org/people/james_m_larossa</href></advocate><advocate for="for respondent"><name>Harry R. Sachse</name><href>https://api.oyez.org/people/harry_r_sachse</href></advocate><advocate for="for respondent"><name>Erwin N. Griswold</name><href>https://api.oyez.org/people/erwin_n_griswold</href></advocate></advocates><decisions><decision type="majority opinion" winning_party="Giglio"><description /><votes majority="7" minority=""><vote opinion_type="none" vote="majority" seniority="2"><justice>William O. Douglas</justice><justice_href>https://api.oyez.org/people/william_o_douglas</justice_href></vote><vote opinion_type="none" vote="majority" seniority="4"><justice>Potter Stewart</justice><justice_href>https://api.oyez.org/people/potter_stewart</justice_href></vote><vote opinion_type="none" vote="majority" seniority="6"><justice>Thurgood Marshall</justice><justice_href>https://api.oyez.org/people/thurgood_marshall</justice_href></vote><vote opinion_type="none" vote="majority" seniority="3"><justice>William J. Brennan, Jr.</justice><justice_href>https://api.oyez.org/people/william_j_brennan_jr</justice_href></vote><vote opinion_type="none" vote="majority" seniority="5"><justice>Byron R. White</justice><justice_href>https://api.oyez.org/people/byron_r_white</justice_href></vote><vote opinion_type="majority" vote="majority" seniority="1"><justice>Warren E. Burger</justice><justice_href>https://api.oyez.org/people/warren_e_burger</justice_href></vote><vote opinion_type="none" vote="majority" seniority="7"><justice>Harry A. Blackmun</justice><justice_href>https://api.oyez.org/people/harry_a_blackmun</justice_href></vote><vote opinion_type="none" vote="none" seniority="8"><justice>Lewis F. Powell, Jr.</justice><justice_href>https://api.oyez.org/people/lewis_f_powell_jr</justice_href></vote><vote opinion_type="none" vote="none" seniority="9"><justice>William H. Rehnquist</justice><justice_href>https://api.oyez.org/people/william_h_rehnquist</justice_href></vote></votes></decision></decisions><source><href>https://api.oyez.org/cases/1971/70-29</href><raw_file>D:\PyCharm Community Edition 2024.3.1.1\PythonProject\IBM Z Datathon\json_data\api.oyez.org_cases_1971_70-29.json</raw_file></source></case> |
