Warning

Info

Table of Contents
Chris22, HLS '22 |

0 0

Back to briefs

Williams v. New York

(1949)

Supreme Court of the United States - 337 U.S. 241

tl;dr:

Consideration of a sentencing report that contains information not presented at trial does not violate a defendant's right to due process.

Video Summary

ICRAIssue, Conclusion, Rule, Analysis for Williams v. New York

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Williams v. New York case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

Facts & HoldingWilliams v. New York case brief facts & holding

Facts:The defendant was convicted of first degree murder by a...

Holding:The consideration of facts not in the record at trial...

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Williams v. New York case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition

Font size -+
Williams v. New York | Case Brief DeepDive
Majority opinion, author: Mr. Justice Black
Level 1
Click below 👇 to DeepDive

The legal case involves a defendant who was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death by a New York state court judge. The judge erred by discussing additional information obtained through the court's Probation Department and other sources in open court. The defendant challenges the constitutionality of New York's policy that allows judges to consider information obtained outside the courtroom from individuals whom the defendant has not been allowed to confront or cross-examine. The case raises a question regarding the rules of evidence that apply to a judge's acquisition of information to guide them in sentencing a convicted defendant. The lower court may have erred in not considering the defendant's argument. The practice of individualizing sentences distinguishes between first-time and repeat offenders, and indeterminate sentences have largely replaced rigidly fixed punishments. Restricting information obtained through investigational techniques would undermine modern penological procedural policies that have been cautiously adopted throughout the nation.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Williams v. New York case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

Dissenting opinion, author: Mr. Justice Murphy
Level 1
Click below 👇 to DeepDive

The dissenting opinion in this case argues that the judge made an error in sentencing the defendant to death, despite the jury's unanimous recommendation for life imprisonment. The judge relied on a probation report that contained inadmissible evidence, including irrelevant allegations of prior crimes and hearsay, which violated the defendant's due process rights. The probation report cannot be admissible in trial and cannot be examined by the defendant in a capital case. Therefore, the judge's reliance on the probation report to sentence the defendant to death was not in compliance with due process, and the recommendation of the jury for life imprisonment should have been respected.

🤯 High points 🤯Key points contributed by students on LSD

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Williams v. New York case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

LSD+ Case Briefs

Features

  • DeepDive for detailed case analysis
  • Over 50,000 existing case briefs
  • Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
  • Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
  • Social learning with chat and high points

Over 50,000 Cases Briefed

LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.

14-Day Free Trial

Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.

Integrated Legal Dictionary

Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.

Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.

DeepDive

DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.

Brief anything. Instantly.

Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.

Social Learning with Chat and High Points

Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.

Real-Time Brief Feedback

Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.

Williams v. New York

Chat for Williams v. New York
brief-758
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.