Reader’s guide · Georgia
Leo Frank: what the majority and dissent disagreed about
Read Frank v. Mangum as a 1915 federal habeas decision, with the majority and Holmes–Hughes dissent kept distinct from a retrial.
- Record
- Frank v. Mangum, 237 U.S. 309
- Issued by
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Date
- April 12, 1915
- Document
- Court opinion
Reading the record
Leo Frank sought federal habeas relief after his Georgia murder conviction. The Supreme Court affirmed the denial of that relief. Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. and Charles Evans Hughes dissented.
The disagreement concerns federal review of the alleged conditions surrounding the state trial, including the effect of a hostile crowd. The majority’s account of the state proceedings and the dissent’s treatment of the petition are different judicial arguments; neither should be presented as the other’s reasoning.
This is not a new jury trial of the evidence concerning Mary Phagan’s murder. Read it as a dated habeas decision, separating what Frank alleged, what the state courts had decided and what the Supreme Court was willing to examine in that proceeding.
Questions to take to the source
- What relief did the petition ask the federal court to provide?
- How do the majority and dissent treat the allegations of mob influence?
- Where does Holmes’s dissent begin, and how does its proposed result differ?
Follow the evidence
Open the source record
These links open the cited documents on their hosts. No account or email is needed to read this guide.
- Frank v. Mangum — official U.S. Reports PDF
Library of Congress scan; the Holmes–Hughes dissent begins on PDF page 37.
Companion reading for True Crime Georgia: The Atlanta Files. This guide addresses the dated records above; later proceedings may have their own decisions.