HICKS V. FEIOCK
485 U.S. 624 (1988)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over child support payments and whether the
contempt that Feiock (D) was being imprisoned for was civil or criminal.
FACTS: Feiock was ordered to pay child support to his ex-wife and three children. He paid
very little over a long period of time and was eventually taken back to court and ordered to
pay. Feiock failed to meet his obligation and was sentenced to 25 days in jail for contempt
but that was suspended and Feiock was placed on probation for three years. As a condition of
probation, he was ordered to pay the $150 per month support and $50 per month on the
accumulated arrearage. Feiock appealed and the appeals court held that the legislative
presumptions applied by the trial court violated Due Process and the Fourteenth Amendment.
The appeals court then annulled the contempt order; the state statute purports to impose 'a
mandatory presumption compelling a conclusion of guilt without independent proof of an
ability to pay,' and is therefore unconstitutional because 'the mandatory nature of the
presumption lessens the prosecution's burden of proof. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment