Winship, In Re 397 U.S. 358 (1970)
WINSHIP, IN RE 397 U.S. 358 (1970)
A 6–3 Supreme Court, speaking through Justice william j. brennan, held here that among the constitutional rights available in juvenile proceedings is the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. A twelve-year-old was charged with a crime which, if done by an adult, would be larceny. The applicable New York statute required only a preponderance of evidence for conviction, and three successive New York courts rejected the contention that the fourteenth amendment required a higher standard of proof. Tracing the requirement back to early United States history, Brennan found "virtually unanimous adherence" to the reasonable doubt standard in common law jurisdictions. He extolled its protective value and spoke of the "vital role" of this "indispensable" standard. "We explicitly hold that the due process Clause protects the accused against conviction except upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which he is charged." Moreover, Brennan could find no obstacle to extending this right to juveniles. Justice hugo l. black, dissenting, charged the majority with amending the bill of rights."Nowhere in that document is there any statement that conviction of crime requires proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."
David Gordon
(1986)