Thompson v. City of Louisville
| Thompson v. City of Louisville | |
|---|---|
| Argued January 11–12, 1960 Decided March 21, 1960 | |
| Full case name | Sam Thompson v. City of Louisville, et al. |
| Citations | 362 U.S. 199 (more) |
| Holding | |
| On the record in this case, Thompson's conviction for loitering and disorderly conduct was so totally devoid of evidentiary support as to be invalid under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Black, joined by unanimous |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. XIV | |
Thompson v. City of Louisville, 362 U.S. 199 (1960), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Court unanimously held that it is a violation of due process to convict a person of an offense when there is no evidence of his guilt. It is one of the rare instances of the Supreme Court's granting certiorari to review a decision of a court so insignificant (the Police Court of Louisville, Kentucky) that state law does not provide any mechanism for appeals from its judgments.
The case is sometimes referred to as the "Shuffling Sam" case, because the petitioner Sam Thompson was known locally as "Shuffling Sam." The Court noted, "There is no evidence that anyone else in the cafe objected to petitioner's shuffling his feet in rhythm with the music of the jukebox."
Associate Justice Hugo Black delivered the opinion of the court. The case was briefed and argued for Thompson by several notable former Supreme Court law clerks.