In Rawlins v. Georgia, the U.S Supreme Court upheld the convictions of five African American men for the murder of a white family in Brooks County, Georgia. The defendants were convicted based on circumstantial evidence and testimonies from two co-defendants who had been promised leniency in exchange for their testimony. The defense argued that these confessions were coerced through torture and fear of mob violence, thus violating due process rights under Fourteenth Amendment protections. However, the court ruled 7-2 against them stating that it could not review state court decisions regarding factual matters such as whether or not confessions were voluntary or involuntary unless there was an accompanying federal question involved.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Rawlins v. Georgia argued that the defendants were not given a fair trial due to public prejudice and hostility, which was fueled by extensive media coverage. The dissenting justices believed that this prejudiced environment prevented the jury from making an impartial decision based on evidence presented at trial. They also pointed out several procedural errors made during the trial, including allowing hearsay evidence and improper instructions given to the jury by the judge. Furthermore, they criticized how quickly both trials were conducted - within two weeks of each other - arguing it did not allow adequate time for defense preparation or for public sentiment to calm down. In their view, these factors combined resulted in a miscarriage of justice as guaranteed under Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause.