Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Alvord v. Florida, 1976 — 428 U.S. 923 · caselaw · US
Constitutional Law · MBE-tested
Alvord v. Florida
428 U.S. 923·Supreme Court of the United States·1976
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 75-6596.
Alvord v. Florida.
[MAJORITY]
Sup.. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.
[DISSENT — Mr. Justice Brennan and Mr. Justice Marshall,]
Mr. Justice Brennan and Mr. Justice Marshall,
dissenting.
Petitioner contends that he was unconstitutionally convicted because a statement he made during in-custody interrogation was admitted in evidence during the prosecution’s case-in-chief, despite the absence of any warning to petitioner that if he could not afford an attorney one would be appointed to represent him before questioning. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (1966). On the record in this case, we would grant certiorari and set the case for oral argument.
In any event, the imposition and carrying out of the death penalty in this case constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Gregg v. Georgia, ante, at 227 (Brennan, J., dissenting); id., at 231 (Marshall, J., dissenting). We would therefore grant certiorari and vacate the judgment in this case insofar as it leaves undisturbed the death sentence imposed.