Mullaney v. Wilbur
United States Supreme Court
421 U.S. 684 (1975)
Stillman Wilbur (defendant) was charged with murder for fatally assaulting Claude Hebert, claiming he acted in the heat of passion after Hebert made sexual advances toward him; Maine's homicide statute required Wilbur himself to prove he acted in the heat of passion on sudden provocation in order to reduce the charge from murder to manslaughter, and he offered no such evidence, leading to his murder conviction, which the Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed. Wilbur then sought federal habeas relief against Mullaney, the prison warden, and both the district court and court of appeals held the prosecution, not Wilbur, was constitutionally required to prove malice beyond a reasonable doubt rather than relying on a presumption Wilbur had to rebut.
Whether the Due Process Clause requires the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the absence of heat of passion on sudden provocation when that issue is properly raised in a homicide case.