Sheppard vs Maxwell

384 U.S. 333 June 6, 1966

Topic: Prejudicial Publicity

FACTS:
Samuel Sheppard was convicted of second-degree murder for the bludgeoning death of his pregnant wife.
Sheppard challenged the verdict on the grounds that he did not receive a fair trial.
He was examined for more than five hours without counsel in a televised three-day inquest conducted
before an audience of several hundred spectators in a gymnasium.
Twenty reporters were assigned seats by the court within the bar and in close proximity to the jury and
counsel, precluding privacy between petitioner and his counsel.
Pervasive publicity was given to the case throughout the trial, much of it involving incriminating matter not
introduced at the trial.
Despite his awareness of the excessive pretrial publicity, the trial judge failed to take effective measures
against the massive publicity, which continued throughout the trial, or to take adequate steps to control the
conduct of the trial.
Sheppard attempted to appeal his case on the grounds that he received an unfair trial due to the influence
of the media on the jurors.

ISSUE: Whether or not the Petitioner was deprived of a fair trial

HELD:
The Court found that Sheppard was not afforded a fair trial.
The Court principally found that the fact that the media broadcasted Sheppards confessions, in addition to
the proven collaboration between the prosecution and the media, inflamed the jurors minds against
Sheppard and did not allow him to receive a fair trial.
The Cleveland television media's repeated broadcasts of Sheppard confessing in detail to crimes he was later
charged with, the blatant and hostile trial coverage by Cleveland's radio and print media, and the physical
arrangement of the courtroom itself - which facilitated collaboration between the prosecution and present
media - all combined to so inflame the jurors' minds against Sheppard as to deny him a fair trial.
Noting that although freedom of expression should be given great latitude, the Court held that it must not
be so broad as to divert the trial away from its primary purpose: adjudicating both criminal and civil matters
in an objective, calm, and solemn courtroom setting.