Boulden v. Holman

PETITIONER: Boulden
RESPONDENT: Holman
LOCATION: Circuit Court of Mobile County

DOCKET NO.: 644
DECIDED BY: Warren Court (1967-1969)
LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

CITATION: 394 US 478 (1969)
ARGUED: Feb 26, 1969
DECIDED: Apr 02, 1969

Facts of the case

Question

Media for Boulden v. Holman

Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - February 26, 1969 in Boulden v. Holman

Earl Warren:

Number 644, Billy Don Franklin Boulden versus William C. Holman Warden.

Mr. Moore.

William B.Moore, Jr.:

Mr. Chief Justice, other members of this Court.

I have been appointed by this Court to represent this petitioner Billy Don Franklin Boulden.

The matter before the Court that we raised originally was on an involuntary confession.

At a later state after we've gone on the Fifth Circuit, the Witherspoon case came out and I raise that point also on state jury and I talked it over the Boulden counsel, both of which have comment in our briefs and in his brief, that what I will comment on both these aspects.

William J. Brennan, Jr.:

Was the Witherspoon point raised below?

William B.Moore, Jr.:

We did not -- I did not raise it below on the Fifth Circuit, no sir.

Because it didn't come out until after I've been to the Fifth Circuit.

That's why, Your Honor, I just want to spawn out things at story.

Byron R. White:

What jurisdiction we have to consider here?

William B.Moore, Jr.:

I believe that in my brief, I have found a case whereby you find it Your Honor you can consider in Clifford -- Stuart versus Sea Groups, the Court pointed out that matters if were not passed on --

Byron R. White:

Federal court.

William B.Moore, Jr.:

Sir?

Byron R. White:

That's what the federal court?

William B.Moore, Jr.:

It's from this Court --

Potter Stewart:

You are the better authority, Mapp against Ohio.

William B.Moore, Jr.:

Sir?

Potter Stewart:

Mapp against Ohio is pretty good authority to you.

William B.Moore, Jr.:

This is a federal -- this is Supreme Court decision that I was referring to here.

It's in the brief.

Byron R. White:

Does this case have it heard from the federal court?

William B.Moore, Jr.:

Yes, it's on appeal it started in state court of Alabama.

Yes, they came through the District Court and then the Court of Appeals and then we're here.

I would like to comment first on the aspect of it having to do with the involuntary confession.

This is a -- as I understand involuntary confession, the totality of circumstances doctrine really gets down to the question of common sense.

Whether or not the accused gave up some right that he had and whether or not he was coerced and whether or not individual can be coerced under these circumstances.

In brief to kept suited here, we have 19-year-old Negro boy, who was on the woods fishing, a 15-year-old white married girl comes along and whether he seduced or not is open to speculation.

In any event, they entered into two acts and as they were coming back down out of the woods, it game warden who was unbeknown either one up in the woods halted them and charged at that point, this young boy took a pistol and shot the game warden.

He apparently lost his head if the evidence is correct because and he took the officer's pistol and emptied it and then he was charged with cutting him with a knife some 55 feet to the woods.