Malloy V Mallay Case Digest

Hartford Connecticut police arrested William Malloy during a gambling raid in 1959. After pleading guilty to a misdemeanor, for selling a pool, Malloy was sentenced to one year in jail and fined $500. However, the sentence was suspended after 90 days and Malloy was placed on two-year’s probation. Almost a year and a half after entering his plea, a Superior Court appointed referee ordered Malloy to testify about gambling and other criminal goings-on in Hartford County. Malloy refused; "on grounds, it may tend to incriminate [him]" he was in turn imprisoned for contempt and held until willing to answer questions. Malloy then filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his incarceration. On appeal from the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors ruling, upholding an adverse Superior Court denial, the Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Hogan raised the question of does the Fourteenth Amendment protect a state witnesses' Fifth Amendment guarantee against self-incrimination in a criminal proceeding? The Supreme Court found that the Fifth Amendment applies at the state level and reversed Malloy's conviction. The Supreme Court ruled that no matter the form of inquiry in criminal proceedings, an individual is in fact protected from self-incrimination. The Court said: the due process clause forbids compulsion to testify by fear of hurt, torture or exhaustion. It forbids any other type of coercion that falls within the scope of due