Litigants: | Martin v. Ohio |
Arguedate: | December 2 |
Argueyear: | 1986 |
Decidedate: | February 25 |
Decideyear: | 1987 |
Fullname: | Earline Martin, Petitioner v. Ohio |
Usvol: | 480 |
Uspage: | 228 |
Parallelcitations: | 107 S. Ct. 1098; 94 L. Ed. 2d 267; 1987 U.S. LEXIS 933 |
Docket: | 85-6461 |
Holding: | Neither Ohio law violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by shifting to petitioner the State's burden of proving the elements of the crime. |
Majority: | White |
Joinmajority: | Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia |
Dissent: | Powell |
Joindissent: | Brennan, Marshall (in full); Blackmun (as to Parts I and III) |
Martin v. Ohio, 480 U.S. 228 (1987), is a criminal case in which the United States Supreme Court held that the presumption of innocence requiring prosecution to prove each element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt only applies to elements of the offense, and does not extend to the defense of justification, whereby states could legislate a burden on the defense to prove justification.[1] The decision was split 5–4.[1] The decision does not preclude states from requiring such a burden on the prosecution in their laws.[1]