Mullaney v. Wilbur
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Powell
The State of Maine requires a defendant charged with murder to prove that he acted “in the heat of passion on sudden provocation” in order to reduce the homicide to *685manslaughter. We must decide whether this rule comports with the due process requirement, as defined in In re Winship, 397 U. S. 358, 364 (1970), that the prosecution prove beyond a reasonable doubt every fact necessary to constitute the crime charged.
I
In June 1966 a jury found respondent Stillman E. Wilbur, Jr., guilty of murder. The case against him rested on his own pretrial statement and on circumstantial evidence showing that…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Duncan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Williams v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Cupp v. NaughtenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- United States v. TuckerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3,258 opinions
- Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Almendarez-Torres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Miller v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 2012
3,253 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.