United States v. Mandujano
| United States v. Mandujano | |
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued November 5, 1975 Decided May 19, 1976 |
|
| Full case name | United States v. Mandujano |
| Docket nos. | 74-754 |
| Citations | 425 U.S. 564 (more)
425 U.S. 564, 96 S. Ct. 1768, 48 L. Ed. 2d 212 (1976)
|
| Prior history |
United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, 365 F.Supp. 155 (W.D.Tex. 1973), Count 1, attempted distribution of heroin: Conviction (without use of Mandujano’s grand jury testimony). Count 2, making false representations: thrown out. United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 496 F. 2d 1050 (5th Cir. 1974), affirmed. |
| Subsequent history | remanded to district court United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 539 F.2d 106 (5th Cir. 1976) |
| Holding | |
|
Miranda warnings are unnecessary to a person called to testify before the grand jury and that false statements given during that testimony may not be suppressed in a subsequent prosecution for perjury. REVERSED AND REMANDED |
|
| Court membership | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Burger, joined by White, Powell, Rehnquist |
| Concurrence | Brennan, joined by Marshall |
| Concurrence | Stewart, joined by Blackmun |
| Stevens took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, 365 F.Supp. 155 (W.D.Tex. 1973), Count 1, attempted distribution of heroin: Conviction (without use of Mandujano’s grand jury testimony). Count 2, making false representations: thrown out.
Miranda warnings are unnecessary to a person called to testify before the grand jury and that false statements given during that testimony may not be suppressed in a subsequent prosecution for perjury.
United States v. Mandujano, 425 U.S. 564 (1976), was a United States Supreme Court case that determined Miranda warnings are unnecessary to be provided to a person called to testify before a grand jury; and that false statements given during that testimony may not be suppressed in a subsequent prosecution for perjury.
In 1973, Roy Mandujano negotiated with an undercover narcotics officer to purchase an ounce of heroin for six hundred fifty dollars. The transaction was never completed. Mandujano was then called before the grand jury, where he testified regarding his familiarity of the heroin industry in San Antonio, Texas. He was not given Miranda warnings before testifying.
After his testimony, Mandujano was arrested for 1) attempted distribution of heroin and 2) perjury, but the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas suppressed the grand jury statements on the grounds that Mandujano was entitled to Miranda warnings before his testimony. Thus, the perjury charge was thrown out; however, Mandujano was convicted of the distribution charge. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the decision to throw out the perjury charges on June 28, 1974.
...
Wikipedia