Lawn v. United States (1957)
- Docket
- 9
- Decided
- 1957-01-01
- Category
- General
Summary
Question: Did the district court abuse its discretion by denying the petitioners a hearing to determine whether information gathered at the first indictment was used in the second proceeding? Conclusion: No. In a 6-3 decision, Justice Charles E. Whittaker wrote the majority opinion, affirming the convictions. The Supreme Court rejected the petitioners' Due Process claims because they laid no foundation for holding a hearing on the issue. The Court also held that a copy of a cancelled check obtained at the first indictment did not violate Due Process when prosecutors introduced it into evidence at the second proceeding. The petitioner’s counsel had explicitly waived any objection to that evidence at trial. Justice John M. Harlan wrote a dissent, stating that the record does not show that petitioner’s counsel waived their objection to entering the cancelled check into evidence. Justices Felix Frankfurter and William J. Brennan joined in the dissent.