Morris v. Florida

Background

Hiram W. Morris Jr., a convicted criminal defendant, had a lawyer who filed a timely notice of appeal and later hired a new attorney to handle the appeal. The State moved to dismiss the appeal for failure to prosecute and told only the defense lawyer, not Morris himself. The defense lawyer then failed to act and the appellate court dismissed the appeal with prejudice, ending Morris’s chance for appellate review. Morris did not receive notice from his lawyer or the court and, when he learned of the dismissal, asked the court to reinstate the appeal and obtained a new lawyer ready to proceed.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court denied review and did not rule on whether the dismissal without notice violated basic fairness. The denial leaves the lower court’s dismissal in place. Justice Black, joined by Justice Douglas, wrote that depriving a person of appellate review because of a lawyer’s inaction, without giving the person notice and a chance to get new counsel, violates fundamental due process. He argued that courts should notify litigants of their lawyers’ defaults and allow a replacement lawyer to pursue the case instead of dismissing it.

Real world impact

As a result of the Court’s refusal to review this case, the dismissal stands and the convicted man remains without appellate review. The opinion does not settle the larger question of how courts must treat lawyer neglect, so similar disputes may return to the courts for a final ruling. The decision is procedural and not a final answer on whether notice is constitutionally required.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Black’s dissent, joined by Justice Douglas, would have granted review and reversed. He insisted on notice and an opportunity to obtain counsel before courts strip persons of appeals due to their lawyers’ neglect.