In re Winship

In re Winship
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued January 20, 1970 Decided March 31, 1970
Full case name	In the Matter of Samuel Winship, Appellant
Citations	397 U.S. 358 (more) 90 S. Ct. 1068; 25 L. Ed. 2d 368; 51 O.O.2d 323
Prior history	91 N.Y.S.2d 1005 (App. Div. 1968), aff'd, 247 N.E.2d. 253 (N.Y. 1969).
Holding
The Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause requires that every element of a criminal offense be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, instead of the preponderance of the evidence standard used heretofore in juvenile court.
Court membership
Chief Justice Warren E. Burger Associate Justices Hugo Black · William O. Douglas John M. Harlan II · William J. Brennan, Jr. Potter Stewart · Byron White Thurgood Marshall
Case opinions
Majority	Brennan, joined by Douglas, Harlan, White, Marshall
Concurrence	Harlan
Dissent	Burger, joined by Stewart
Dissent	Black
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV

In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970), was a United States Supreme Court decision that held that when a juvenile is charged with an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult, every element of the offense must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, not preponderance of the evidence.^[1] The case has come to stand for a broader proposition, however: in a criminal prosecution, every essential element of the offense must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. See, e.g., Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 477 (2000); Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 278 (1993).^[2]

See also

• List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 397

References

1. Varat, J.D. et al. Constitutional Law Cases and Materials, Concise Thirteenth Edition. Foundation Press, New York, NY: 2009, p. 356
2. Varat, p. 357