Reference no: EM133286684

Assignment:

John Benton was charged with burglary and larceny in a Maryland court. A jury found him not guilty of larceny but guilty of burglary. He was sentenced to ten years in prison. He won his appeal on the grounds that the grand jury that indicted him and the petit jury that convicted him were selected unconstitutionally. The case was remanded, or returned to the lower court, and Benton chose to confront a new grand jury. It indicted him for larceny and burglary; the petit jury found him guilty of both charges. Benton then appealed, arguing that re-indicting him on the larceny charge after he had been acquitted amounted to double jeopardy. The Maryland Supreme Court affirmed, following the U.S. Supreme Court's Palko v. Connecticut (1937) decision, which held that the double-jeopardy clause did not apply to state court criminal proceedings.

The Court overruled Palko in a 7-2 decision, holding that the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment does apply to the states. As a result, Benton's larceny conviction was overturned.

Source: Oyez, Benton v. Maryland (1969)

1. Identify the constitutional provision that is common in both Benton v. Maryland (1969) and either Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) or Roe v. Wade (1973).

2. Describe the conflict between state power and individual rights as it relates to Benton v. Maryland (1969).

3. Explain how the case opinion in Benton v. Maryland (1969) compares with either Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) or Roe v. Wade (1973).