Infamous Misdemeanors and the Grand Jury Clause

40 Pages Posted: 10 Apr 2017 Last revised: 15 Jul 2018

See all articles by Gabriel Jackson Chin

Gabriel Jackson Chin

University of California, Davis - School of Law

John Ormonde


Date Written: April 6, 2017


Under an overlooked body of constitutional law, many more federal offenses must be prosecuted by grand jury indictment than is now the practice. Current rules provide that felonies must be prosecuted by grand jury indictment, but misdemeanor charges may be based on a prosecutor’s information, or even a “ticket” issued by a law enforcement officer. However, serious consequences fall on people convicted of federal misdemeanors, including deportation, sex offender or other criminal registration, ineligibility for public benefits, and loss of civil rights. In the late 19th and early 20th century, the Supreme Court held in a series of cases, never overruled, that to charge an infamous misdemeanor required a grand jury indictment. The Court held that infamous offenses were ones potentially resulting in stigmatizing punishments degrading the offender’s status, indicating that the person is less than a full member of the community. These include corporal punishment, incarceration in a prison or penitentiary (as opposed to a jail), loss of civil rights or imposition of civil disabilities, and convictions implying moral turpitude. Many federal misdemeanors carry these consequences. And federal misdemeanors are much more likely to be dismissed without trial than felonies. More thoughtful evaluation of misdemeanor cases before charge would often terminate cases which wind up being dismissed after charge. As a result, thousands of Americans would avoid the stigma of a criminal record where it is unwarranted. This is what the framers of the Constitution intended.

Keywords: Grand Jury, Collateral Consequences, Federal Prosecutions, Indictment, Information, Infamous Crimes, Infamous Punishment

Suggested Citation

Chin, Gabriel Jackson and Ormonde, John, Infamous Misdemeanors and the Grand Jury Clause (April 6, 2017). Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 102, Forthcoming, Available at SSRN:

Gabriel Jackson Chin (Contact Author)

University of California, Davis - School of Law ( email )

Martin Luther King, Jr. Hall
400 Mrak Hall Dr.
Davis, CA 95616-5201
United States
520-401-6586 (Phone)
530-754-5311 (Fax)

John Ormonde

Independent ( email )

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics