Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.
-
Upload
dora-smith -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.
![Page 1: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
Rolando V. del Carmen
![Page 2: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to a Trial By Jury – Jury Size
• Williams v. Florida (1970)• Ballew v. Georgia (1978)
– Unanimous versus Nonunanimous Verdicts• Apodaca v. Oregon (1972)• Johnson v. Louisiana (1972)
![Page 3: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to a Trial By Jury – Serious versus Petty Offenses
• Baldwin v. New York (1970)• Blanton v. North Las Vegas (1989) • Lewis v. United States (1996)
– Waiver of a Jury Trial• Singer v. United States (1965)
– The Selection of a Jury of Peers• Taylor v. Louisiana (1975)
![Page 4: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to a Trial By Jury – The Disqualification of Jurors Based
on Race• Batson v. Kentucky (1986)• Strauder v. West Virginia (1880) • Holland v. Illinois (1990)• Johnson v. California (2005) • Georgia v. McCullum (1992)• Powers v. Ohio (1991)• Campbell v. Louisiana (1998)
![Page 5: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to a Trial By Jury – The Disqualification of Jurors Based
on Gender• J.E.B. v. Alabama (1994)
![Page 6: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to a Trial By Jury – The Constitutionality of “Death-
Qualified Juries”• Lockhart v. McCree (1986)• Witherspoon v. Illinois (1968)
![Page 7: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to a Trial By Jury – The Strengthening of the Role of
Juries in Sentencing • Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000)• Ring v. Arizona (2002)
![Page 8: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Counsel– Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)– Constitutionally required in the following
proceedings:• Custodial interrogations• Lineups, if formal charges have been filed• Preliminary examination• Arraignment• Trial• Sentencing• Appeal from a conviction, if available to others
![Page 9: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Counsel– Not constitutionally required in the
following proceedings:• Criminal investigation• Arrest, unless the suspect is interrogated• Grand jury proceedings• Habeas corpus proceedings• Probation or parole revocation
![Page 10: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Counsel– Why Counsel is Needed
• Powell v. Alabama (1932)• Iowa v. Tovar (2004)
![Page 11: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Counsel– How Counsel is Obtained
• Retained counsel – an attorney chosen and paid by the accused
– Wheat v. United States (1988)
• Court-Appointed Counsel– Indigent Defendant– Fuller v. Oregon (1974)
![Page 12: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Counsel– The Responsibility of the Defense
Lawyer– The Right to Court-Appointed Counsel
during the Trial • Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972)• Scott v. Illinois (1979)• In re Gault (1967)
![Page 13: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Counsel– The Difficulty of Proving Ineffective
Assistance of Counsel • Specific errors must be pointed out• Effective assistance is assumed • United States v. Cronic (1984)• Strickland v. Washington (1984)• Wiggins v. Smith (2003)• Yarborough v. Gentry (2003)
![Page 14: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Counsel– Claims of Ineffective Assistance of
Counsel in Death Penalty Cases• A Sleeping Lawyer
– Burdine v. Johnson (5th Cir. 2001)
• Silent Lawyer– Bell v. Cone (2002)
• A Lawyer who had the Victim as a Client– Mickens v. Taylor (2002)
![Page 15: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Counsel– The Right to Act as One’s Own
Counsel• Faretta v. California (1975) • Constitutional requirements that must be
met:– Awareness of the right to counsel– Express waiver– Competency of the accused
![Page 16: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Due Process– The Brady Rule on Disclosure of
Evidence to the Accused• Mooney v. Holohan (1935)• Brady v. Maryland (1963)
– Cases after Brady• United States v. Agurs (1976)• United States v. Bagley (1985)• Kyles v. Whitley (1995)• Strickler v. Greene (1999)
![Page 17: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right Against Self-Incrimination– The Scope of the Provision:
Testimonial not Physical• Gilbert v. California (1967)• South Dakota v. Neville (1983)
![Page 18: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right Against Self-Incrimination– Two Separate Privileges during Trials:
The Accused and the Witness• The Privilege of the Accused
– Not to take the stand and not to testify• Griffin v. California (1965)
– Fair Response• United States v. Robinson (1988)
![Page 19: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right Against Self-Incrimination– Two Separate Privileges during Trials:
The Accused and the Witness• The Privilege of a Witness
– Refuse to disclose any information that may tend to incriminate him or her
• United States v. Balsys (1998)
![Page 20: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right Against Self-Incrimination– The Grant of Immunity
• Immunity in criminal cases means that the person granted immunity will not be prosecuted in a criminal case, either fully or partially—depending upon the type of immunity granted—for testimony given before a grand jury, in court, or in some other proceeding from which prosecution could otherwise have resulted.
• Murphy v. Waterfront Commission (1964)
![Page 21: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right Against Self-Incrimination– Comparison between Transactional
and Use and Derivative Use Immunity• Transactional immunity• Use and derivative use immunity• Kastigar v. United States (1972)
![Page 22: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right Against Self-Incrimination– How the Right is Waived
• Failure to Assert• Partial Disclosure• Taking the Witness Stand
![Page 23: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right Against Double Jeopardy– What Double Jeopardy Means
• Successive prosecution of a defendant for the same offense by the same jurisdiction
• North Carolina v. Pearce (1969)• Three elements for double jeopardy to
occur:– Successive prosecution– Same offense– Same jurisdiction
![Page 24: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right Against Double Jeopardy– When Double Jeopardy Starts– When Double Jeopardy Is Waived
• In mistrials• When a verdict of conviction is set aside
on a defendant’s motion or appeal• In habeas corpus cases • Green v. United States (1957)• Burks v. United States (1978)
![Page 25: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right Against Double Jeopardy– What Same Offense Means
• Blockburger v. United States (1932)• Illinois v. Vitale (1980)• Brown v. Ohio (1977)
– What Lesser Included Offense Means • Rutledge v. United States (1996)
![Page 26: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Constitutionality of Prosecution for a Higher Offense After Conviction for a Lesser Included Offense– “if the facts needed to prove the higher
offense had not yet been discovered at the time of the first trial, despite the prosecution’s due diligence,”
and– “if at the time the first case is tried, events
have not yet occurred that are needed for the second crime.”
![Page 27: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Constitutionality of Prosecution for the Same Offense by Two States– Heath v. Alabama (1985)
![Page 28: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Confront Witnesses – The Right to Cross-Examine Opposing
Witnesses• Crawford v. Washington (2004)
– The Right to Physical Presence During Trial
– Deliberate Absence• Taylor v. United States (1973)
– Disruptive Conduct in the Courtroom• Illinois v. Allen (1970)
![Page 29: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Confront Witnesses – Coy v. Iowa (1988)– Maryland v. Craig (1990)– The Right to Know the Identify of
Prosecution Witnesses• United States v. Owens (1988)
![Page 30: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Compulsory Process to Obtain Witnesses – Webb v. Texas (1972)– Chambers v. Mississippi (1973)
![Page 31: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to a Speedy and Public Trial– A Speedy Trial
• Barker v. Wingo (1972)• Doggett v. United States (1992)• Speedy Trial Act of 1974
– A Public Trial
![Page 32: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to a Fair and Impartial Trial– The Prohibition of Prejudicial Publicity
• Irvin v. Dowd (1961)• Rideau v. Louisiana (1963)• A Public Trial
![Page 33: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to a Fair and Impartial Trial– Controlling Prejudicial Publicity
• Change of Venue• Sequestration• Continuance • Issuance of a gag rule• Control of the press• Sheppard v. Maxwell (1966)
![Page 34: Chapter Twelve – Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial Rolando V. del Carmen.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649da85503460f94a94d2b/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Constitutional Rights of the Accused During Trial
The Right to Proof of Guilt Beyond a Reasonable Doubt– What Must Be Proved – Reasonable Doubt
• Moore v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1965)• Cage v. Louisiana (1990)• Sullivan v. Louisiana (1993)• Victor v. Nebraska (1994)