United States v. Miller (1985)

United States v Miller
Argued January 16, 1985
Decided April 1, 1985
Full case nameUnited States v James Rual Miller
Docket no.83-1750
Citations471 U.S. 130 (more)
ArgumentOral argument
Opinion announcementOpinion announcement
Case history
Prior728 F.2d 1269, 715 F.2d 1360
Holding
The Fifth Amendment's Grand Jury Clause is not violated if a trial jury finds a defendant guilty without having found all of an indictment's parts proven.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr. · William Rehnquist
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Case opinion
MajorityMarshall, joined by Burger, Brennan, White, Blackmun, Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor
Powell took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Laws applied
V Amendment, Grand Jury Clause
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings
Ex parte Bain, 121 U.S. 1 (1887)

United States v. James Rual Miller, 471 U.S. 130 (1985) was a Supreme Court case in which the court held that the Fifth Amendment's Grand Jury Clause is not violated if a federal defendant is found guilty by a trial jury without having found "all" parts of an indictment proved. This case partly overruled Ex parte Bain in that a grand jury's indictment is not "final", and its scope for conviction may be narrowed by the prosecution during trial. This case allows for prosecutors to simply prove a defendant committed criminal acts at least mentioned in an indictment, but need not prove all the allegations in their entirety.


© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search