Martin v. Ohio
| Martin v. Ohio | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued December 2, 1986 Decided February 25, 1987 | |
| Full case name | Earline Martin, Petitioner v. Ohio |
| Docket no. | 85-6461 |
| Citations | 480 U.S. 228 (more) 107 S. Ct. 1098; 94 L. Ed. 2d 267; 1987 U.S. LEXIS 933 |
| Holding | |
| Neither Ohio law violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by shifting to petitioner the State's burden of proving the elements of the crime. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | White, joined by Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia |
| Dissent | Powell, joined by Brennan, Marshall (in full); Blackmun (as to Parts I and III) |
Martin v. Ohio, 480 U.S. 228 (1987), is a criminal case in which the United States Supreme Court held that the presumption of innocence requiring prosecution to prove each element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt only applies to elements of the offense, and does not extend to the defense of justification, whereby states could legislate a burden on the defense to prove justification.[1]: 18 The decision was split 5–4.[1]: 18 The decision does not preclude states from requiring such a burden on the prosecution in their laws.[1]: 18
See also[edit]
- List of United States Supreme Court cases
- Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume
- List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Rehnquist Court
References[edit]
- ^ a b c Criminal Law - Cases and Materials, 7th ed. 2012, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business; John Kaplan, Robert Weisberg, Guyora Binder, ISBN 978-1-4548-0698-1, [1]
External links[edit]
- Text of Martin v. Ohio, 480 U.S. 228 (1987) is available from: Findlaw Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)
 | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
 | This Ohio-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |