Britt v. North Carolina

Background

A man tried for murder had a three-day trial that ended in a hung jury. A retrial was set for the next month. Between trials he said he was poor and asked the court for a free transcript of the first trial. The state trial court denied the request and the North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed. The State’s highest court refused review, and the case reached the United States Supreme Court to decide whether the Griffin rule applied.

Reasoning

The Court said the Griffin rule — that poor defendants must be given the basic tools others can buy — does apply. The Court identified two factors for deciding when a free transcript is required: how valuable the transcript is to the defendant, and whether adequate alternatives exist. Here the Court noted the second trial had the same judge, the same lawyer, and the same court reporter a month later. At argument the defendant’s lawyer said the reporter would have read back his notes informally. Because the defendant conceded that substitute, the Court concluded no constitutional violation and affirmed the denial.

Real world impact

The decision confirms that states must provide transcripts when truly needed, but it also allows a denial when a defendant has a substantially equivalent alternative. The ruling is narrow and fact-specific, so it does not create a broad new right to free mistrial transcripts in every retrial situation.

Dissents or concurrances

A dissent argued the transcript is ordinarily essential, that calling the reporter is an inadequate substitute, and that the denial here should have been reversed.