 | This article includes a list of general references, but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations. (July 2022) |
Johnson v. Louisiana, 406 U. S. 356 (1972), was a court case in the U.S. Supreme Court involving the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Louisiana law that allowed less-than unanimous jury verdicts (9 to 12 jurors) to convict persons charged with a felony, does not violate the Due Process clause. This case was argued on a similar basis as Apodaca v. Oregon.[1]
| Johnson v. Louisiana | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued March 1, 1971 Reargued January 10, 1972 Decided May 22, 1972 | |
| Full case name | Frank Johnson, Petitioner v. Louisiana |
| Docket no. | 69-5035 |
| Citations | 406 U.S. 356 (more) 92 S.Ct. 1620, 32 L.Ed.2d 152 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Reargument | Reargument |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Case history | |
| Prior |
|
| Questions presented | |
| Do less-than-unanimous jury verdicts in certain cases violate the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment? | |
| Holding | |
| The Louisiana law that allowed a defendant to be convicted of a felon without a unanimous jury does not violate the equal protection clause and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution for failure to satisfy the reasonable doubt standard. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | White, joined by Burger, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist |
| Concurrence | Blackmun |
| Concurrence | Powell |
| Dissent | Douglas, joined by Brennan, Marshall |
| Dissent | Brennan, joined by Marshall |
| Dissent | Stewart, joined by Brennan, Marshall |
| Dissent | Marshall, joined by Brennan |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amends. XIV | |
Overruled by | |
| Ramos v. Louisiana | |
- ^ "Apodaca v. Oregon". Oyez. Retrieved April 22, 2022.