Jencks v. United States (1956)
- Docket
- 23
- Decided
- 1956-01-01
- Category
- General
Summary
Question: Can a defendant request testimonial documents for admissibility in trial if those documents potentially contain classified information and possible disclosure of state secrets? Conclusion: Yes. Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. wrote the opinion for the 7-1 majority. The Court held that the government's reports should have been produced for review for their admission in court. A concern for national security must be weighed against prosecuting criminal action if the criminal action prosecution relies on documents that, if released, would threaten national security. Based on this weighing test, the documents should have been provided for review of admissibility in a new trial. Criminal action must be dismissed if the government refuses to release information as a matter of national security. Justice Harold Burton wrote a concurring opinion in which he agreed that the accused had the right to review the documents as evidence against him but argued that the disclosure of the documents should not guarantee a new trial. Rather, the documents should be reviewed and, if found to contain information that discredited the FBI informants’ testimony, then there should be a new trial. However, in this case Justice Burton agreed there should be a new trial on the grounds that the jury was improperly instructed on the requirements of membership to a political party. Justice John M. Harlan joined in the concurrence. Justice Tom C. Clark dissented and argued that, if information containing national secrets and issues of national security were available for the accused in criminal prosecutions, then national security would be greatly compromised. Justice Clark also wrote that the jury was properly instructed on the definition of membership to a political party. Justice Charles E. Whittaker did not participate in the discussion or decision of this case.