- [Man] The original Bill of Rights protected the rights
of citizens from infringement by the federal government
but made no mention of the states.
The 14th amendment, which was adopted
shortly after the Civil War protected
citizenship and individual rights
from infringement by state governments.
Under the 14th amendment's due process clause,
the United States Supreme Court
began to apply the most important rights guaranteed
in the Bill of Rights against the states.
This process began in the early 1900s
and is known as the doctrine of selective incorporation.
Duncan versus Louisiana was the landmark case
in which the court incorporated the Sixth Amendment right
to a jury trial against the states.
In 1966, Gary Duncan was charged in Louisiana
with simple battery, a misdemeanor punishable
by up to two years in prison and a $300 fine.
Duncan requested a jury trial, but at the time,
Louisiana granted jury trials only in cases punishable
by execution or imprisonment at hard labor
and the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial
had not yet been incorporated against the states.
Duncan's request was denied, he was convicted
after a bench trial and sentenced
to 60 days in prison and a $10 fine.
Duncan appealed to the Louisiana Supreme Court
but it declined to hear the case.
Duncan then petitioned the United States Supreme Court
for review, asserting that the Sixth and 14th Amendments
guaranteed his right to a jury trial.
The issue before the Court was whether the Sixth
and 14th Amendments guarantee the right to a jury trial
in state-level criminal prosecutions.
The court held that the right to a jury trial is fundamental
to the American criminal justice system
and that the 14th Amendment guarantees the right
to a jury trial in all criminal prosecutions
for serious crimes including those brought in state courts.
Writing for the Court, justice White reasoned
that only those rights that are fundamental
should be incorporated against the states
through the 14th Amendment, after considering the history
of the right to a jury trial in English
and American common law, White determined that the right
to a jury trial was well established throughout English
and American history, the jury rights shielded
criminal defendants from oppressive
and overreaching governments, the court concluded
that the right to a jury trial is a fundamental right
and thus, should be incorporated against the states
through the 14th Amendment's due process clause.
The court also noted that historically, this right
has applied only to serious crimes while petty offenses
did not give rise to a right to a jury trial.
The court then had to determine whether simple battery
was a serious crime under Louisiana law.
The state argued that it was a petty offense
because Duncan was sentenced to only 60 days in prison.
However, because the maximum possible sentence
for the offense was two years in prison,
the Court found Duncan's actual sentence was irrelevant.
The court decided that any crime carrying
a potential two-year sentence was a serious offense
triggering the right to a jury trial.
However, the court didn't articulate the exact line
between petty and serious offenses.
Thus, the court held that the state of Louisiana
violated Duncan's 14th Amendment right to a jury trial
by charging him with a serious offense
and denying him a trial by jury.
Accordingly, Duncan's conviction was reversed.
Justice Black concurred, joined by Justice Douglas.
Justice Black supported total incorporation
of the Bill of Rights against the states.
Black believe that the 14th Amendment was intended, in part,
to apply the entire Bill of Rights to the states,
even still, Black was supportive
of the courts' selective approach to incorporation.
Justice Fortas also wrote a concurring opinion.
Fortas agreed that the right to a jury trial
should be incorporated against the states
but he was concerned that the majority's opinion
would be construed to require states to implement
the federal procedures for jury trials, such as requiring
unanimous verdicts and 12-person jury panels.
Fortas believed the exact form of the jury
was not fundamental to the right and that states
should be permitted to formulate
their own rules and procedures
as long as they don't impair the actual right.
Justice Harlan dissented, joined by Justice Stewart.
Harlan believed that the 14th Amendment required
state criminal trials to be fair in all aspects
but that it didn't necessarily require a trial by jury.
Harlan believed that each state should be able to formulate
its own rules and procedures regarding criminal trials
so long as those procedures were fair.
Duncan versus Louisiana represented another important step
in the Court's gradual selective incorporation
of the Bill of Rights against the states
through the 14th Amendment.
(scratching)