Eilenbecker v. District Court of Plymouth County was a Supreme Court case decided in 1978. The case involved a challenge to the constitutionality of a Wisconsin statute that allowed a defendant to be tried in a county other than the one in which the crime was committed. The defendant, Eilenbecker, argued that the statute violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court held that the statute did not violate the Due Process Clause. The Court reasoned that the statute was a reasonable exercise of the state's power to regulate the administration of justice. The Court noted that the statute was designed to ensure that defendants receive a fair trial and that it did not impose an undue burden on the defendant. The Court also noted that the statute was not overly broad and that it did not interfere with the defendant's right to a jury trial. The Court concluded that the statute was a reasonable exercise of the state's power to regulate the administration of justice and did not violate the Due Process Clause.

In the dissenting opinion of Eilenbecker v. District Court of Plymouth County, Justice Marshall argued that the majority's decision was wrongfully decided and should be reversed. He believed that a defendant in a criminal case has an absolute right to have his or her guilt determined by a jury trial, regardless of whether they are charged with misdemeanors or felonies. In this particular case, he felt that it was unconstitutional for the state court to deny Eilenbecker’s request for a jury trial on misdemeanor charges because it violated his Sixth Amendment rights as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Furthermore, Justice Marshall argued that if states were allowed to deny defendants their right to have their cases heard before juries then there would be no real protection against arbitrary convictions and sentences imposed upon them without due process being followed. As such, he concluded that denying someone like Eilenbecker his constitutional right is not only unjust but also undermines our system of justice as well as our fundamental freedoms enshrined in law since its inception over two centuries ago