Hurtado vs California, 110 US 516 (1884) FACTS: 1.

Hurtado was charged with murder in the killing of Jose Stuardo, and pleaded not guily 2. Sacramento County Court handed out death penalty and was affirmed by the California Supreme Court 3. Hurtado appeared before the Sacaramento Superior Court, for the fixing of execution date and filed his objection a. He was never legally indicted or presented by any grand jury b. Proceedings, including the laws and constitution of Californial attempting to authorize them, are in conflict and prohibited by Amendments 5 and 14 of the US Consitution, and are therefore void c. If no grand jury and void, Hurtado will be executed,, the Hurtado is deprived of life or liberty without due process 4. Sacramento Superior Court overrules objections and fixed Hurtado s execution date. 5. Hurtado appealed to the California Supreme Court, but lost. By writ of error, a review by the US Supreme Court was allowed. ISSUE: W/N Hurtado was denied due process without being presented or indicted by a grand jury? HELD: 1. The 14th Amendment provides Nor shall any state deprive any p[erson of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law a. Same as 5th Amendment with specific and express provision perpetuating the institution of grand jury for the most aggravated crimes under US laws b. Natural and obvious inference is that due process of law was not meant to exclude, ex vi termini, the institution and procedure of a grand jury in any case. 2. Under the 5th Amendment, due process of law refers to the law of the land which derives its authority from the legislative powers conferred upon Congress by the US Constitution, exercised within limits and interpreted according to principles of common law. 3. Under the 14th Amendment, due process of law refers to the law of the land which derives its authority from inherent and reserved powers of state and the greatest security for which resides in the right of the people to make their own laws and alter them at their pleasure. 4. Great diversities in these respects may exist in two states separated by an imaginary line. i. Each state prescribes its own modes of judicial proceeding. ii. Any legal proceeding, enforced by public authority, sanctioned by age or custom, or devised in the discretion of legislative power in the furtherance of the general public good, which regards and preserves the principles of liberty and justice, must be held to be due process of law. 5. The Court is unable to to say that the substitution for a presentment or indictment by a grand jury, by information, by a magistrate, is not due process of law. 6. The Court found no error and thus affirmed the judgment of the California Supreme Court.