Case law · Highest court · Federal

Berger v. United States

Decided
April 15, 1935
Docket
544
Status
Published
Jurisdiction
Federal

Cited 4,581 timesOverruled on other grounds (not yet verified)Possible negative treatment: overruled on other grounds, overruled, overruled in part on other grounds (not yet verified) · State v. Inman

What later courts said

  • holding that a new trial was warranted where prejudice stemming from prosecutorial misconduct was highly probable; Court did not indicate whether error was constitutional — People v. Blackmon (2008)
  • holding that a variance is impermissible where it deprives the defendant of the right against double jeopardy — United States v. Cynthia M. Stoner (1996)
  • holding that “while [the prosecutor] may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones” — United States v. Thomas (1996)

Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.

How the opinion begins

Mr. Justice Sutherland delivered the opinion of the Court. . Petitioner was indicted in a federal district court charged with having conspired with seven other persons named in the indictment to utter counterfeit notes pur [*80] porting to be issued by designated federal reserve banks, with knowledge that they had been counterfeited. The indictment contained eight additional counts alleging substantive offenses. Among the persons named in the indictment were Katz, Rice and Jones. Rice and Jones were convicted by the jury upon two of the substantive counts and the conspiracy count. Petitioner was convicted upon the conspiracy count only. Katz pleaded guilty to the conspiracy count, and testified for the government upon an arrangement that a nolle prosequi as to the substantive counts would be entered. It is not necessary now to refer to the evidence further than to say that it tended to establish no't a single conspiracy as charged but two conspiracies — one between Rice and Katz and another between Berger, Jones and Katz. The only connecting link between the two was that Katz was in both conspiracies and the same counterfeit money had to do with both. There was no evidence that Berger was a party to the conspiracy between Rice and Katz. During the trial, the United States attorney who prosecuted the case for the government was guilty of misconduct, both in connection with his cross-examination of witnesses and in his argument to the jury, the particulars of which we consider at a later point in this opinion. At the conclusion of the evidence, Berger moved to dismiss the indictment as to the conspiracy count, on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to support the charge. That motion was denied. Petitioner, Rice, Katz and Jones were sentenced to terms of imprisonment.

The court of appeals, affirming the judgment, 73 F. (2d) 278, held that there was a variance between the allegations of the conspiracy count and the proof, but that it was not prejudicial; and that the conduct of the prosecuting attorney, although to be condemned, was not sufficiently grave to affect the fairness of the trial. We brought the case here on certiorari because of a conflict [*81] with other circuit courts of appeals in respect of the effect of the alleged variance.

1. It is settled by the great weight of authority that although an indictment charges a conspiracy involving several persons and the proof establishes the conspiracy against some of them only, the variance is not material. But several circuit courts of appeals have held that if the indictment charges a single conspiracy, and the effect of the proof is to split the conspiracy into two, the variance is fatal. Thus it is said in Telman v. United States, 67 F. (2d) 716, 718:

Statutes cited

  • 28 U.S.C. § 391

Cite this

Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935)

Read the full opinion

Free account needed

Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.