In re Oliver
| In re Oliver | |
|---|---|
| Argued December 16, 1947 Decided March 8, 1948 | |
| Full case name | In re Oliver |
| Citations | 333 U.S. 257 (more) 68 S. Ct. 499; 92 L. Ed. 2d 682 |
| Holding | |
| Incarceration for contempt of court requires notice and to provide accused opportunity for defense. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Black, joined by Vinson, Reed, Douglas, Murphy, Rutledge, Burton |
| Concurrence | Rutledge |
| Dissent | Frankfurter |
| Dissent | Jackson, joined by Frankfurter |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amends. VI, XIV | |
In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257 (1948), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of the right of due process in state court proceedings. The Sixth Amendment in the Bill of Rights states that criminal prosecutions require the defendant "... to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation...and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." In this case, a witness in a Michigan grand jury hearing was convicted and sentenced to jail without either notice or attorney assistance.