Clift v. Alabama

Background

A man was tried and convicted in Alabama for second-degree murder and given 25 years in prison. He was later tried on a separate robbery charge from the same episode, objected that this violated the protection against being tried twice for the same conduct, was convicted, and received an additional 10-year sentence. An intermediate Alabama court affirmed the robbery conviction but ordered the robbery sentence to run at the same time as the murder sentence. The Supreme Court of Alabama disagreed and held that robbery and murder were separate offenses that could be prosecuted in separate trials even though they arose from the same transaction. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up the case.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the Constitution’s protection against being tried or punished twice for the same offense requires all charges from a single incident to be resolved in one proceeding. Justice Brennan, joined by Justice Marshall, argued in dissent that the Constitution, as applied to the states, generally requires that all charges arising from one episode be prosecuted together except in very limited circumstances. He cited earlier opinions expressing the same view and said he would have granted review and reversed the Alabama court’s decision allowing separate prosecutions.

Real world impact

Because the Supreme Court declined review, the Alabama high court’s ruling stands in this case. That means, under the state decision, people charged with multiple crimes from one event can face separate trials and separate sentences. The U.S. Supreme Court has not issued a final ruling on whether the Constitution bars that practice nationally, so the issue could be revisited later.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Brennan’s dissent emphasizes constitutional protection against multiple prosecutions for one episode and would have reversed the state court’s separate-prosecution rule; Justice Marshall joined that view.