Hurtado v. California
Citation: 110 U.S. 516 (1884) Court: United States Supreme Court
Facts
Joseph Hurtado was charged with murder in California through an information filed by a prosecutor rather than by grand jury indictment. He was convicted and sentenced to death. Hurtado argued that the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause required California to use grand jury indictments, as mandated by the 5th Amendment in federal proceedings.
Issue
Does the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment require states to prosecute felonies by grand jury indictment, as the 5th Amendment requires in federal cases?
Holding
No. The Supreme Court upheld Hurtado’s conviction, holding that the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause does not incorporate the 5th Amendment’s grand jury requirement against the states.
Rule / Doctrine
The 5th Amendment grand jury requirement is not incorporated against the states through the 14th Amendment. States may use alternative charging procedures — such as prosecution by information — as long as those procedures comport with due process. This case remains good law today; grand jury indictment is one of the few Bill of Rights provisions never incorporated against the states.
Significance
Hurtado is an early and foundational case in the incorporation doctrine, establishing that not every federal procedural right is automatically required of the states. The case illustrates the selective incorporation framework and explains why, even today, states are not required to use grand juries. It is also notable for the Court’s reasoning that due process should not be read to simply replicate existing common-law procedures.