Moore v. Duckworth

Citation443 U.S. 713,99 S.Ct. 3088,61 L.Ed.2d 865
Decision Date02 July 1979
Docket NumberNo. 78-5795,78-5795
PartiesMarshall C. MOORE v. Jack P. DUCKWORTH, Warden
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

PER CURIAM.

Upon a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity, the petitioner was found guilty by an Indiana jury of murder in the second degree. The Indiana Supreme Court upon direct appeal affirmed the conviction. Moore v. State, 260 Ind. 154, 293 N.E.2d 28 (1973). The petitioner then sought a writ of habeas corpus in a Federal District Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He claimed, inter alia, that he had been denied due process of law because he had been convicted upon evidence allegedly insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was sane at the time the victim was killed.* The District Court denied the writ, and the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed. 581 F.2d 639 (1978).

In holding that the District Court had been correct in rejecting the petitioner's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction, the Court of Appeals stated that such a challenge presents a federal due process issue "only where a state court conviction is totally devoid of evidentiary support." Id., at 642. The petitioner claims that this was error, and he urges that under In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 90 S.Ct. 1068, 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970), a state prisoner is entitled to a determination whether the record evidence could support a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We agree. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560. Nonetheless, under the circumstances of this case we conclude that a remand for further consideration in light of Jackson v. Virginia would be inappropriate.

The petitioner has contended that the prosecution failed to meet its burden because it relied upon lay witnesses to prove sanity without providing any expert testimony to rebut his expert opinion testimony. But, as the Court of Appeals noted, under Indiana law sanity may be established by either expert or lay testimony. The state appellate court, in an opinion thoroughly discussing the record evidence and the petitioner's sufficiency challenge, concluded that the lay evidence in this case could have been credited by the jury, and it held that the State's evidence was fully sufficient to support a jury finding beyond a reasonable doubt that the petitioner was sane at the time of the killing.

The Court of Appeals properly deferred to the Indiana law governing proof of sanity. Although that court applied an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
65 cases
  • Holloway v. McElroy
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • 11 Diciembre 1980
    ...Court, certiorari was denied in Eleuterio on the same day-July 2, 1979-that it issued its per curiam order in Moore v. Duckworth, 443 U.S. 713, 99 S.Ct. 3088, 61 L.Ed.2d 865 (1979), discussed infra. See Project, Ninth Annual Review of Criminal Procedure: United States Supreme Court and Cour......
  • Greider v. Duckworth
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • 11 Marzo 1983
    ...cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1147, 102 S.Ct. 1010, 71 L.Ed.2d 300. Moore v. Duckworth, 581 F.2d 639, 642 (7th Cir.1978), aff'd 443 U.S. 713, 99 S.Ct. 3088, 61 L.Ed.2d 865. And, the jury may credit the testimony of lay witnesses who observed Greider shortly after commission of the crime, Moore v. ......
  • Watson v. Nix
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Iowa
    • 9 Febrero 1982
    ...conviction. See Pilon v. Bordenkircher, 444 U.S. 1, 100 S.Ct. 7, 62 L.Ed.2d 1 (1979) (per curiam); Moore v. Duckworth, 443 U.S. 713, 99 S.Ct. 3088, 61 L.Ed.2d 865 (1979) (per curiam); Lenza v. Wyrick, 665 F.2d 804, 811-812 (8th Cir.1981); Holloway v. McElroy, 632 F.2d 605, 636-39 (5th Cir.1......
  • Jacks v. Duckworth
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • 14 Agosto 1981
    ...342 N.E.2d 838 (1976). Indiana law on the issue of sanity is controlling. Moore v. Duckworth, 581 F.2d 639, 641 (7th Cir. 1978), affirmed, 443 U.S. 713; Brooks v. Rose, 520 F.2d 775 (6th Cir. 1975). Indiana jurors are permitted to credit the testimony of lay witnesses as well as expert witn......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Protecting first federal habeas corpus petitions: closing the opening left by Gomez.
    • United States
    • Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Vol. 87 No. 3, March 1997
    • 22 Marzo 1997
    ...v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (1980); Pilon v. Bordenkircher, 444 U.S. 1 (1979); Rose v. Mitchell, 443 U.S. 545 (1979); Moore v. Duckworth, 443 U.S. 713 (1979); Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979); County Court of Ulster County, N.Y. v. Allen, 442 U.S. 140 (1979); Greene v. Massey, 437 U.S......

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