Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

377 U.S. 407

Marder v. Massachusetts

Supreme Court of the United States

June 1, 1964

Rehearing Denied Oct. 12, 1964.

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1964-10-12

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Petition denied / appeal dismissed · 6–3 · Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1964-10-12

How this case has been cited

Cited by 106 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2004 · most notably United States v. Borelli (1964), United States v. Giese (1979)

83 federal appellate · 1 district · 17 state decisions

59019641970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

See 85 S.Ct. 17.

Irving Marder, pro se.

Edward W. Brooke, Atty. Gen. of Massachusetts, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

¶2

Mr. Justice GOLDBERG, with whom Mr. Justice DOUGLAS joins, dissenting.

¶3

This appeal raises the question of whether a person charged with a traffic violation (or presumably any other criminal offense) may be forced by a statute, General Laws of Mass. c. 90, §§ 20 and 20A, to choose between foregoing a trial by pleading guilty and paying a small fine, or going to trial and thereby exposing himself to the possibility of a greater punishment if found guilty. I express no view on the merits of this question. But I would note probable jurisdiction, since the issue, in my view, presents a substantial federal question, and since I am not convinced that the generally sound advice to 'pay the two dollars' necessarily reflects a constitutionally permissible requirement.

¶4

Mr. Justice WHITE is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

/377/us/407 · .json · Public domain