United States Supreme Court
409 U.S. 524 (1973)
Ham (defendant) was convicted of marijuana possession. Ham was a bearded African American and worked as a civil rights activist. At his trial, Ham argued that the police were out to get him and that he had been framed for the drug charge. Before trial, Ham requested that during voir dire the judge ask the potential jurors two questions inquiring into whether they had any prejudice against African Americans, and one question inquiring into any prejudice they may have against people with beards. The trial judge denied the request and asked the potential jurors three general questions about biases or prejudices they may hold. Ham claims that in so doing, the trial court violated his constitutional rights. The state supreme court disagreed with Ham. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Douglas, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 200,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.