SHeppard v. maxwell
Year: 1966
Result: 8:1, favor Sheppard
Related Constitutional issue/amendment: 1st amendment (free speech and press); 5th amendment (fair trial); 6th amendment (public trial); 14th amendment (due process)
Civil Rights or Civil Liberties: Liberties
Significance/Precedent: The strong presence of the media in cases is inevitable, but this case caused justices to urge jurors to avoid paying any attention to the media or discussing with other jurors. This may be the most reasonable way to limit the impact of media bias and prejudice on the verdict of a trial.
Quote from majority opinion: "The court's fundamental error is compounded by the holding that it lacked power to control the publicity about the trial. From the very inception of the proceedings the judge announced that neither he nor anyone else could restrict prejudicial news accounts. And he reiterated this view on numerous occasions. Since he viewed the news media as his target, the judge never considered other means that are often utilized to reduce the appearance of prejudicial material and to protect the jury from outside influence. We conclude that these procedures would have been sufficient to guarantee Sheppard a fair trial and so do not consider what sanctions might be available against a recalcitrant press nor the charges of bias now made against the state trial judge."
6-word summary: excessive publicity prevents a fair trial
Result: 8:1, favor Sheppard
Related Constitutional issue/amendment: 1st amendment (free speech and press); 5th amendment (fair trial); 6th amendment (public trial); 14th amendment (due process)
Civil Rights or Civil Liberties: Liberties
Significance/Precedent: The strong presence of the media in cases is inevitable, but this case caused justices to urge jurors to avoid paying any attention to the media or discussing with other jurors. This may be the most reasonable way to limit the impact of media bias and prejudice on the verdict of a trial.
Quote from majority opinion: "The court's fundamental error is compounded by the holding that it lacked power to control the publicity about the trial. From the very inception of the proceedings the judge announced that neither he nor anyone else could restrict prejudicial news accounts. And he reiterated this view on numerous occasions. Since he viewed the news media as his target, the judge never considered other means that are often utilized to reduce the appearance of prejudicial material and to protect the jury from outside influence. We conclude that these procedures would have been sufficient to guarantee Sheppard a fair trial and so do not consider what sanctions might be available against a recalcitrant press nor the charges of bias now made against the state trial judge."
6-word summary: excessive publicity prevents a fair trial