STOGNER V. CALIFORNIA 539 U.S. 607 (2003) CASE BRIEF

STOGNER V. CALIFORNIA

539 U.S. 607 (2003)

NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over a criminal prosecution that was brought after expiration of the time periods set forth in previously applicable statutes of limitations.

FACTS: In 1993, California enacted a new criminal statute of limitations governing sex-related child abuse crimes. The new statute permits prosecution for those crimes where '[t]he limitation period specified in [prior statutes of limitations] has expired'--provided that (1) a victim has reported an allegation of abuse to the police, (2) 'there is independent evidence that clearly and convincingly corroborates the victim's allegation,' and (3) the prosecution is begun within one year of the victim's report. 1 In 1998, a California grand jury indicted Marion Stogner (D) charging him with sex-related child abuse committed decades earlier--between 1955 and 1973. D moved for the complaint's dismissal; the Federal Constitution's Ex Post Facto Clause, Art. I, 10, cl. 1, forbids revival of a previously time-barred prosecution. The trial court agreed that such a revival is unconstitutional. The California Court of Appeal reversed, citing a recent, contrary decision by the California Supreme Court, People v. Frazer, 21 Cal. 4th 737, 982 P. 2d 180 (1999), cert. denied, 529 U. S. 1108 (2000). D then moved to dismiss his indictment, arguing that his prosecution is unconstitutional under both the Ex Post Facto Clause and the Due Process Clause, Amdt. 14, 1. The trial court denied D's motion, and the Court of Appeal upheld that denial. 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.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner