Cardinale v. Louisiana

Decision Date01 April 1969
Docket NumberNo. 76,76
Citation22 L.Ed.2d 398,89 S.Ct. 1161,394 U.S. 437
PartiesPhilip CARDINALE, Jr., Petitioner, v. LOUISIANA
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Nathan Greenberg, Gretna, La., for petitioner.

Preston H. Hufft, Chalmette, La., for respondent.

Mr. Justice WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

Petitioner brutally murdered a woman near New Orleans, and then fled the State. He had been seen with his victim, and a warrant was issued for his arrest. In the course of his flight petitioner came to Tucson, Arizona, where he decided to surrender. He flagged down a police car and, after an interruption by the police to warn him that he need not speak, that his speech might be used against him, and that he had a right to contact an attorney, was taken to the station house where he poured out a confession. His confession was introduced in its entirety in the subsequent trial for murder in which petitioner was convicted and sentenced to death. Petitioner does not now contend that his confession was involuntary or that his admission of guilt to the Tucson police was inadmissible in evidence. He objects solely to the admission of those parts of his confession which he argues were both irrelevant and prejudicial in his trial for murder. A Louisiana statute requires that confessions must be admitted in their entirety, La.Rev.Stat. § 15:450, and petitioner contends that this is unconstitutional.

Although certiorari was granted to consider this question, the fact emerged in oral argument that the sole federal question argued here had never been raised, preserved, or passed upon in the state courts below. It was very early established that the Court will not decide federal constitutional issues raised here for the first time on review of state court decisions. In Crowell v. Randell, 10 Pet. 368, 9 L.Ed. 458 (1836), Justice Story reviewed the earlier cases commencing with Owings v. Norwood's Lessee, 5 Cranch 344, 3 L. Ed. 120 (1809), and came to the conclusion that the Judiciary Act of 1789, c. 20, § 25, 1 Stat. 85, vested this Court with no jurisdiction unless a federal question was raised and decided in the state court below. 'If both of these do not appear on the record, the appellate jurisdiction fails.' 10 Pet. 368, 391. The Court has consistently refused to decide federal constitutional issues raised here for the first time on review of state court decisions both before the Crowell opinion, Miller for Use of United States v. Nicholls, 4 Wheat. 311, 315, 4 L.Ed. 578 (1819), and since, e.g. Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Oklahoma Retail Grocers Ass'n, Inc., 360 U.S. 334, 342, n. 7, 79 S.Ct. 1196, 1201, 3 L.Ed.2d 1280 (1959); State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. Duel, 324 U.S. 154, 160-163, 65 S.Ct. 573, 576-577, 89 L.Ed. 812 (1945); McGoldrick v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 309 U.S. 430, 434-435, 60 S.Ct. 670, 672-673, 84 L.Ed. 849 (1940); Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357, 362-363, 47 S.Ct. 641, 643-644, 71 L.Ed. 1095 (1927); Dewey v. Des Moines, 173 U.S. 193, 197-201, 19 S.Ct. 379, 380-381, 43 L.Ed. 665 (1899); Murdock v. City of Memphis, 20 Wall. 590, 22 L.Ed. 429 (1875).

In addition to the question...

To continue reading

Request your trial
60 cases
  • Chambers v. Mississippi 8212 5908
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • February 21, 1973
    ...upon this Court's authority to review judgments of state courts. It is a jurisdictional limitation, Cardinale v. Louisiana, 394 U.S. 437, 438, 89 S.Ct. 1161, 1162, 22 L.Ed.2d 398 (1969), that has always been interpreted with careful regard for the delicate nature of the authority conferred ......
  • Doe v. Delaware
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • March 9, 1981
    ...640, 41 L.Ed. 1087 (1897); Crowell v. Randell, 10 Pet. 368, 391-392, 398, 9 L.Ed. 458 (1836); cf. Cardinale v. Louisiana, 394 U.S. 437, 438-439, 89 S.Ct. 1161, 1162-1163, 22 L.Ed.2d 398 (1969) (dismissal of writ of certiorari); Beck v. Washington, 369 U.S. 541, 549-554, 82 S.Ct. 955, 959-96......
  • Hemphill v. New York
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • January 20, 2022
    ...; Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Slade , 216 U.S. 78, 83–84, 30 S.Ct. 230, 54 L.Ed. 390 (1910) ; Cardinale v. Louisiana , 394 U.S. 437, 439, 89 S.Ct. 1161, 22 L.Ed.2d 398 (1969) ; see also Howell , 543 U.S., at 445, 125 S.Ct. 856 (noting "the long line of cases clearly stating that the......
  • Regents of University of California v. Bakke
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 28, 1978
    ...849 (1940). See also Massachusetts v. Westcott, 431 U.S. 322, 97 S.Ct. 1755, 52 L.Ed.2d 349 (1977); Cardinale v. Louisiana, 394 U.S. 437, 439, 89 S.Ct. 1161, 1163, 22 L.Ed.2d 398 (1969). Cf. Singleton v. Wulff, 428 U.S. 106, 121, 96 S.Ct. 2868, 2877, 49 L.Ed.2d 826 (1976). We therefore do n......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Who's afraid of Henry Hart?
    • United States
    • Constitutional Commentary Vol. 14 No. 1, March 1997
    • March 22, 1997
    ...v. Warren City School Dist. Bd. Of Education, 465 U.S. 75 (1984); Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90 (1980). (37.) Cardinale v. Louisiana, 394 U.S. 437 (1969). Editors of Hart & Wechsler have disagreed among themselves over how strict the procedural default rule should be. See Hart & Wec......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT