digplanet beta 1: Athena
Share digplanet:

Agriculture

Applied sciences

Arts

Belief

Business

Chronology

Culture

Education

Environment

Geography

Health

History

Humanities

Language

Law

Life

Mathematics

Nature

People

Politics

Science

Society

Technology

Robinson v. California
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued April 17, 1962
Decided June 25, 1962
Full case name Robinson v. California
Citations 370 U.S. 660 (more)
Prior history Appeal from the Appellate Department, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, 370 U.S. 660.
Holding
Punishing a person for a medical condition is a violation of the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
Court membership
Case opinions
Majority Stewart, joined by Warren, Black, Douglas, Harlan, Brennan
Concurrence Douglas
Concurrence Harlan
Dissent Clark
Dissent White
Frankfurter took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962)[1], is the United States Supreme Court case striking down a California law that criminalized people for being addicted to narcotics.[1] Until the Robinson opinion, all Eighth Amendment decisions addressed whether the method of punishment was cruel and unusual,[2] or whether a punishment was too excessive in light of the nature of the crime, so as to make the severity of the sentence cruel and unusual.[3] Robinson was the first case to place substantive limits on who or what the government can criminalize. Following the Robinson decision, the Court invalidated a Texas law criminalizing homosexual acts through anti-sodomy laws under Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), and upheld a law criminalizing public drunkenness under Powell v. Texas, 392 U.S. 514, 517 (1968).

Robinson was stopped by a police officer who observed "tracks" on Robinson's arms from heroin use. The officer claimed Robinson admitted that he had occasionally injected narcotics, though Robinson denied admitting this, and also denied being an addict. The police arrested him under California law making it a misdemeanor to "be addicted to the use of narcotics"; Robinson was convicted, and sentenced to 90 days' imprisonment.

While the Robinson Court held that a law criminalizing drug addiction is a violation of the Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual punishment, the reasoning underlying the constitutional violation is multi-layered, and differed among the Justices. First, Justice Stewart's opinion (joined by Justices Black, Warren, and Brennan,) in combination with Douglas's concurring opinion, recognized that drug addiction is a disease, and that people cannot be constitutionally punished for having a disease.[4] Justice Stewart wrote that even "one day in prison for the 'crime' of having a common cold," would be cruel and unusual.[5] Second, Justice Stewart's opinion, in combination with Justice Harlan's concurring opinion, held that it is unconstitutional to criminalize behavior in the absence of an act, or actus reus.[6] Justice Stewart's opinion focused on the unconstitutionality of punishing a mere status or condition,[7] while Justice Harlan's concurring opinion focused on the unconstitutionality of punishing a "bare desire.".[8]

By June 25, 1962, the day the Court handed down this decision, Lawrence Robinson had already been dead for more than ten months. In fact, he was dead before his appeal papers were filed in the Supreme Court. The California Attorney General's office discovered this fact upon remand and notified the Court, since this arguably mooted the case long before its decision. The Court, however, did not vacate the Robinson decision as moot. See Robinson v. California, 371 U.S. 905 (1961) (order denying petition for rehearing and abatement of judgment with dissent).

In 1968, this case was used to challenge a Texas law against public intoxication in Powell v. Texas.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Robinson v. CA, 370 U.S. 660; The statute was § 11721 of the California Health and Safety Code. It provided: ‘No person shall use, or be under the influence of, or be addicted to the use of narcotics, excepting when administered by or under the direction of a person licensed by the State to prescribe and administer narcotics.’
  2. ^ Wilkerson v. State of Utah, 99 U.S. 130, 136 (1878); In re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 436, 447 (1890); Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86, 101 (1958); For example, in Francis v. Resweber, 329 U.S. 459 (1947), the Court considered whether Louisiana could try a second time to electrocute a convicted murderer, after the first attempt failed because of a defect in the State's electric chair. (The Court held, 5-4, that re-electrocuting the defendant Frances was not cruel and unusual.)
  3. ^ See Anthony F. Granucci, “Nor Cruel and Unusual Punishments Inflicted”: The Original Meaning, 57 CAL.L.REV. 839 (1969).
  4. ^ Robinson, 370 U.S. at 667-676
  5. ^ Robinson, 370 U.S. at 667
  6. ^ Id. at 664, 678-679
  7. ^ Id. 666-667
  8. ^ Id. 678-679

External links[edit]

Works related to Robinson v. California at Wikisource

  • ^ Text of Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962) is available from:  Findlaw  Justia 

Original courtesy of Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson_v._California — Please support Wikipedia.
This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia. A portion of the proceeds from advertising on Digplanet goes to supporting Wikipedia.
519985 videos foundNext > 

simon & garfunkel mrs robinson

Simon And Garfunkel Lyrics http://b0ludecesvarias.blogspot.com.ar http://www.fotolog.com.ar/ahorayya2 letra de la cancion And here's to you, Mrs. Robinson Je...

Simon & Garfunkel - Mrs. Robinson (Audio)

Music video by Simon & Garfunkel performing Mrs. Robinson. (C) 1968 Sony Music Entertainment.

Sir Ken Robinson: Do schools kill creativity?

http://www.ted.com Sir Ken Robinson makes an entertaining and profoundly moving case for creating an education system that nurtures (rather than undermines) ...

Chris Robinson and The New Earth Mud - ...If you see California

This is one of my favorites songs by Chris Robinson & The New Earth Mud (Belongs to This Magnificient Distance from 2004) New Earth Mud are: Chris Robinson A...

Gaspard.et.Robinson.Tony.Gatlif.1990.V.Fr.avi

ESTA PELICULA OCUPA UN LUGAR SAGRADO EN MI CORAZÓN. VIVAN LOS SERES HUMANOS CUYO CORAZÓN ES MAS GRANDE QUE SUS CUERPOS. GRACIAS PRIMICO TONY GATLIF.

Eagles - Hotel California (Lyrics)

Lyrics: On a dark desert highway, cool wind in my hair Warm smell of colitas, rising up through the air Up ahead in the distance, I saw a shimmering light My...

Chris Robinson - ...If You See California

This is song from the album "This Magnificent Distance". Enjoy.

Kelly v. California - 2008 U.S. Supreme Court appeal evidence

Video from the United States Supreme Court's website showing the life of a victim of a murder in California. This was used by the prosecution in the trial of...

Chris Robinson - if You See California

Lemonheads - Mrs Robinson

Lemonheads - Mrs Robinson.

519985 videos foundNext > 

We're sorry, but there's no news about "Robinson v. California" right now.

Loading

Oops, we seem to be having trouble contacting Twitter

Talk About Robinson v. California

You can talk about Robinson v. California with people all over the world in our discussions.

Support Wikipedia

A portion of the proceeds from advertising on Digplanet goes to supporting Wikipedia. Please add your support for Wikipedia!