Edelman v. California (344 U.S. 357)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 12, 1953 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 344 U.S. 357 · 73 S. Ct. 293
- Docket
- No. 85
- Argued
- November 19, 1952
- Decided
- January 12, 1953
- Term
- October Term 1952
- Vote
- 7–2
- Majority author
- Justice Clark
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Petition denied or appeal dismissed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
How the Justices voted
- Majority
- Chief Justice Vinson, Justice Minton, Justice Clark (wrote), Justice Burton, Justice Frankfurter, Justice Reed
- Concurring in the judgment
- Justice R. H. Jackson (wrote)
- Dissenting
- Justice Douglas, Justice Black (wrote)
Opinion excerpt
Mr. Justice Clark delivered the opinion of the Court. Petitioner stands convicted under § 647 (5) of the Penal Code of California, which provides in relevant part that “Every . . . dissolute person . . . [i]s a vagrant, and is punishable by a fine of not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment.” The conviction was affirmed by the Appellate Department of the Los Angeles County Superior Court in an order which recited that the appeal had been submitted without argument. A motion to recall the remittitur and vacate the judgment of the appellate court was denied without opinion after a full hearing before three judges. We granted certiorari because of serious constitutional questions raised as to the validity of the vagrancy statute and its application to the petitioner. 343 U. S. 955. However, on oral argument, doubts arose as to whether the federal questions were properly presented by the record. Accordingly, it is necessary at the outset to determine whether we have jurisdiction in this case. Petitioner contends, first, that his conviction violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because the vagrancy statute is vague, indefinite and uncertain. The record indicates that this defense was not raised on trial but was presented for the first time as the fifth of…
Excerpt of a 16,865-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.