Frisbie v. Collins - 342 U.S. 519, 72 S. Ct. 509 (1952)

Rule:

The power of a court to try a person for crime is not impaired by the fact that he had been brought within the court's jurisdiction by reason of a "forcible abduction." Due process of law is satisfied when one present in court is convicted of crime after having been fairly apprised of the charges against him and after a fair trial in accordance with constitutional procedural safeguards. There is nothing in the Constitution that requires a court to permit a guilty person rightfully convicted to escape justice because he was brought to trial against his will.

Facts:

Respondent Shirley Collins brought a habeas corpus case in district court seeking release from a Michigan state prison where he was serving a life sentence for murder. Respondent’s petition alleged that while he was living in Chicago, Michigan officers forcibly seized, handcuffed, blackjacked and took him to Michigan. He claimed that the trial and conviction under such circumstances was in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Federal Kidnapping Act, and that therefore, his conviction was a nullity. The District Court denied the writ without a hearing on the ground that the state court had power to try respondent regardless of how presence was procured. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the cause for hearing, holding that the Federal Kidnaping Act had changed the rule declared in prior holdings of the Supreme Court, that a state could constitutionally try and convict a defendant after acquiring jurisdiction by force. Certiorari was granted. 

Issue:

Could a state court try a defendant even if such defendant was brought within the court’s jurisdiction due to a forcible abduction?  

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

On appeal, the Court reversed the judgment of the court of appeals and affirmed the district court's denial of respondent's habeas petition. The Court held that there were sound arguments to support the conclusion that prompt decision of the issues raised was desirable. The Court ruled that power of a court to try a person for crime was not impaired by the fact that he had been brought within the court's jurisdiction due to a forcible abduction. Finally, the Court held that the Federal Kidnapping Act could not be fairly construed so as to add to the list of sanctions a sanction barring a state from prosecuting persons wrongfully brought to it by its officers.