Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Brown V Mississippi

    Uploaded by

    Paul
    139 views3 pages
    This case is an IRAC appraisal of the mother of all cases - Brown v Mississipi and a summary outlook on the court's raison d'eterie

    Original Title

    Brown v Mississippi

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case is an IRAC appraisal of the mother of all cases - Brown v Mississipi and a summary outlook on the court's raison d'eterie

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    139 views3 pages

    Brown V Mississippi

    Uploaded by

    Paul
    This case is an IRAC appraisal of the mother of all cases - Brown v Mississipi and a summary outlook on the court's raison d'eterie

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    Brown v Mississippi

    Facts

    Two persons – Henry Shields and Ed Brown - were each convicted of having committed

    a felony – murder. However, the exclusive evidence tendered against them in court was their

    personal confessions which were procured after some violent interrogation.

    Procedural History

    The celebrated case of Brown v. Mississippi began at the trial court of the state of

    Mississippi where the defendants were pronounced guilty before an appeal was made for the

    Supreme Court of the same state. At the appellate level, the verdict of the trial court was

    sustained but was crushed for want of due process at the apex court – the US Supreme Court.

    Issue

    The issue then lies whether convictions, that depend exclusively on confessions

    demonstrated to have been produced by extortions from the state officers by violence and

    brutality, are in tandem with the due process of law needed by the 14th Amendment of the

    Constitution.

    Rule

    The Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment becomes violated the moment a

    confession which was gotten through physical torture has been utilized in convicting a defendant.

    Application

    It was contended that following Twining v. New Jersey, the exception from mandatory

    self-incrimination in states’ courts does not become secured by whatever part of the Federal
    Constitution. Also, relying on Snyder v. Massachusetts, it was held that the US Supreme Court

    discovered the privilege towards self-incrimination may be taken away and the accused may be

    put on the stand as a state witness. However, it was opined by the majority that compulsion by

    torturing to produce a confession remains a different subject. Therefore, it was concluded that the

    trial court remain fully advised about the available evidence of how the confessions were

    produced. Thus, the conviction as well as sentence remain void for lack of the suitable elements

    of due process, and the proceeding thus remained vitiated and may be challenged in whatever

    reasonable way.

    Conclusion

    The case fully shows how federal constitutional rights are usually applicable to the states

    via the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause. The US Supreme Court set aside the verdict

    convicting the defendants. The freedom of the state to check the courts’ procedure was restricted

    by the due process requirements. Overtly, the proceedings became vitiated by the absence of the

    proper characters of due process and may be challenged in any suitable way.
    References

    Brown v. Mississippi. 297 U.S. 278, 56 S. Ct. 461, 80 L. Ed. 682, 1936 U.S. LEXIS 527 (U.S.

    Feb. 17, 1936)

    You might also like