United States v Miller | |
---|---|
Argued January 16, 1985 Decided April 1, 1985 | |
Full case name | United States v James Rual Miller |
Docket no. | 83-1750 |
Citations | 471 U.S. 130 (more) |
Argument | Oral argument |
Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
Case history | |
Prior | 728 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 | |
| |
Case opinion | |
Majority | Marshall, 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 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, 121 U.S. 1 (1887), 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.