Smith v. Missouri

Background

Willie J. Smith and another man, Edward Johnson, broke into a St. Louis apartment occupied by Hermine Rohs, her son Willy Rohs, and Marilyn Rohs. They robbed the occupants, raped both women, and stabbed all three to death. Smith was indicted on three counts of first‑degree murder. The State first tried Smith for Marilyn Rohs’s murder; a jury convicted him of first‑degree murder and sentenced him to life. The State then tried him for Willy Rohs’s murder; again convicted and given a life sentence to run consecutively to the first. The prosecutor then entered nolle prosequi on the third indictment. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed both convictions, and Smith asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

Reasoning

The central question was whether prosecuting multiple murder charges from the same episode in separate trials violated the Double Jeopardy Clause. The Supreme Court denied Smith’s petition for review and did not reverse the state courts. Justice Brennan, joined by Justices Douglas and Marshall, dissented. He argued that the Double Jeopardy Clause — applied to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment — generally requires that all charges arising from a single criminal episode be joined in one trial, and that the separate prosecutions here were not justified by any narrow exception.

Real world impact

Because the Court refused to take the case, the Missouri convictions and consecutive life sentences remain in effect. The denial leaves unresolved, at the national level, the specific double‑jeopardy question raised here. The dissent indicates that at least three Justices would have granted review and would have reversed on double‑jeopardy grounds.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Brennan’s dissent explains he would have granted review and reversed, relying on prior opinions that endorse joining related charges into a single trial and finding no applicable exception in this case.