Williams v. Florida (No. 927) ___
Syllabus	Opinion [ White ]	Concurrence [ Burger ]	CDInPart [ Black ]	Dissent [ Marshall ]	Dissent [ Harlan ]	Dissent [ Stewart ]
HTML version PDF version	HTML version PDF version	HTML version PDF version	HTML version PDF version	HTML version PDF version	HTML version PDF version	HTML version PDF version

BURGER, C.J., Concurring Opinion

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

---

399 U.S. 78

Williams v. Florida

CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT

---

No. 927 Argued: March 4, 1970 --- Decided: June 22, 1970

---

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE BURGER, concurring.

I join fully in MR. JUSTICE WHITE's opinion for the Court. I see an added benefit to the "notice of alibi" rule in that it will serve important functions by way of disposing of cases without trial in appropriate circumstances -- a matter of considerable importance when courts, prosecution offices, and legal aid and defender agencies are vastly overworked. The prosecutor upon receiving notice will, of course, investigate prospective alibi witnesses. If he finds them reliable and unimpeachable, he will doubtless reexamine his entire case, and this process would very likely lead to dismissal of the charges. In turn, he might be obliged to determine why false charges were instituted and where the breakdown occurred in the examination of evidence that led to a charge.

On the other hand, inquiry into a claimed alibi defense may reveal it to be contrived and fabricated, and the [p106] witnesses accordingly subject to impeachment or other attack. In this situation, defense counsel would be obliged to reexamine his case, and, if he found his client has proposed the use of false testimony, either seek to withdraw from the case or try to persuade his client to enter a plea of guilty, possibly by plea discussions which could lead to disposition on a lesser charge.

In either case, the ends of justice will have been served, and the processes expedited. These are the likely consequences of an enlarged and truly reciprocal pretrial disclosure of evidence and the move away from the "sporting contest" idea of criminal justice.