Tumey v. Ohio
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 29–30, 1926
Decided March 7, 1927
Full case nameTumey v. State of Ohio
Citations273 U.S. 510 (more)
47 S. Ct. 437; 71 L. Ed. 749; 1927 U.S. LEXIS 708
Case history
PriorPetition in error dismissed, Tumey v. State, 115 Ohio St. 701, 155 N.E. 698 (1926).
Court membership
Chief Justice
William H. Taft
Associate Justices
Oliver W. Holmes Jr. · Willis Van Devanter
James C. McReynolds · Louis Brandeis
George Sutherland · Pierce Butler
Edward T. Sanford · Harlan F. Stone
Case opinion
MajorityTaft, joined by a unanimous court
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV

Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927), is a US Supreme Court case, concerning the due process of judicial disqualification.[1] The court struck down an Ohio law that financially rewarded public officials for successfully prosecuting cases related to Prohibition.[2][3] The court's decision in this case continues to provide precedent today in many cases involving judicial impartiality.[4]

Background

The mayor of the village of North College Hill, Ohio received $12 for every defendant convicted before him. Ed Tumey was convicted before the mayor of unlawfully possessing intoxicating liquor.

Opinion of the Court

The court held that Tumey's conviction violated the Fourteenth Amendment, reasoning that it "deprives a defendant in a criminal case of due process of law to subject his liberty or property to the judgment of a court, the judge of which has a direct, personal, substantial pecuniary interest in reaching a conclusion against him in his case."[5]

See also

References

  1. ↑ Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927). Public domain This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document.
  2. ↑ Blount, Jim, "U. S. Supreme Court decision stopped crusading village mayors Archived 2007-10-26 at the Wayback Machine," Journal-News, February 12, 2003. Retrieved on 3/30/2008.
  3. ↑ "Tumey v. Ohio," Ohio History Central, July 1, 2005. Retrieved on 3/9/2008.
  4. ↑ Layman, James, "Judicial Campaign Speech Regulation: Integrity or Incentives?," Georgetown University Law Center, Summer 2006.
  5. ↑ Tumey, 273 U.S. at 523.
  • Kastenberg, Joshua E., Chief Justice William Howard Taft's Conception of Judicial Integrity: The Legal History of Tumey v. Ohio (2017). Cleveland State Law Review. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2959072


This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.