Ch12
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Ch12

on

  • 200 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
200
Views on SlideShare
200
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Ch12 Ch12 Presentation Transcript

  • THE 6TH AMENDMENT: RIGHT TO COUNSEL AND A FAIR TRIAL Chapter 12
  • Introduction    The 6th Amendment is not that familiar to the public It deals with the fairness at trial and the right to a lawyer during the time leading up to and during prosecution The 6th Amendment protects the individual against the government’s unlimited resources and ensure a fair trial
  • Speedy and Public Trial   The 6th Amendment require a speedy and public trial A delayed or prolonged trial is inherently unfair  With the assumption of a person is innocent until proven guilty, each individual charged with a crime has the right to have their determination made as quickly as possible
  • Speedy and Public Trial   Delay that harms the accused’s defense may cause the charges to be dismissed Ba rke r v. Wing o (1972)  A trial is sufficiently “speedy” is determined by 1. 2. 3. 4. The length of the delay The reason for the delay The defendant’s assertion of this right The harm caused
  • Speedy and Public Trial  G a nne tt Co . v. De Pa s q ua le (1979)   The Court held that the 6th Amendment does not permit the public to attend every trial Ric hm o nd N ws p a p e rs , I . v. Virg inia (1980) e nc  The public does have the right to attend trials unless there is a compelling government interest in doing otherwise  For example, in cases involving National Security
  • Where the Trial Is Held   6th Amendment requires that the trial occur in the district in which the crime was committed Venue  The geographical area in which a specific case may come to trial, and the area from which the jury is selected
  • Where the Trial Is Held  A defendant may seek a change of venue for several reasons: 1. Such prejudice in the county where the case is to be tried that the defendant cannot obtain a fair and impartial trial there 2. Another location is much more convenient for the parties and witness than the intended place of trial, and the interests of justice require a transfer of location
  • An Impartial Jury    The 6th Amendment requires an impartial and representative jury All crimes involving the potential of jail time do not require a jury trial “Petty crimes” do not require a jury trial   No definition of what a petty crime is More serious offenses warrant a jury trial  Generally those who punishments could exceed jail time of six months
  • An Impartial Jury FEDERAL   12 person jury is required in federal court Federal juries must reach a unanimous vote for conviction STATE    State trials do not required to have 12 jurors States require a unanimous vote only in death penalty cases Supreme Court declared that state courts have a minimum of 6 jurors  a unanimous verdict must be reached to find the defendant guilty
  • An Impartial Jury  Voir dire   The process of questioning potential jurors to determine their impartiality Peremptory challenges  A specific number of allowances given to each side in a case so that they may assert to remove a potential juror for any reason whatsoever
  • An Impartial Jury  Ba ts o n v. Ke ntuc ky (1986)  Held that prosecutors’ peremptory challenges to exclude from a jury members of the defendant’s race based only on racial grounds violates the equal protection rights of both the defendant and the excluded juror
  • An Impartial Jury  To try defendants before juries unfairly composed of a group likely to find against them has been held a denial of equal protection  Stra ud e r v. We s t Virg inia (1879)  The Court held that a black defendant could not be tried before a jury from which all members of his race were purposely excluded
  • An Impartial Jury   For tactical reasons, a person might waive the right to a jury trial and select a court trial Having the case heard before only the bench (judge), without a jury
  • Jury Nullification   When a jury believes that a defendant to be guilty but acquits that person because they do not feel the circumstances would make a conviction fair or they disagree with the law Why would a jury nullify a law?   Mostly because they do not agree with it or think it is unjust A jury may also feel the penalty is too harsh for the circumstances
  • Current Events DOUG DARREL L    In September 2012 a jury unanimously acquitted him in New Hampshire for marijuana cultivation charges His attorney argued that he was growing cannabis for his own religious and medicinal use He escaped prison because his attorney convinced the jury to nullify the charges against him
  • The Right to Confront Witnesses   The confrontation clause of the 6th Amendment requires that witnesses be present in court so that the defendant can confront them The Supreme Court has supported state laws that protect juvenile victims by permitting child abuse victims to testify via one-way closed circuit television
  • The Right to Confront Witnesses   The 6th Amendment also excludes hearsay evidence Hearsay    An out-of-court statement used to prove the truth of the matter asserted Can include statements made by the person actually testifying, before taking the stand Evidentiary law pertaining to hearsay and exceptions is complex and voluminous
  • Compulsory Process   Permits a defendant to require witnesses to appear in court, usually under the issuance by the court of a subpoena Subpoena   Requires an individual to appear in court to testify or to bring documents or other physical evidence to the court Can be served by an officer of the court, or by any other adult who is not a party to the action
  • Right to Counsel    The right to counsel is the only 6th Amendment guarantee that extends beyond the trial Everyone has the right to legal representation Every lawyer has an obligation to do everything legally permissible to see that the client’s rights are upheld
  • Right to Counsel     It is to ensure that those accused are afforded their legal right and that they understand the process in which they are involved Based on the adversarial justice system  Places one party against another to resolve a legal issue The prosecutor must prove the accused beyond a reasonable doubt The defense lawyer must raise a doubt to win their case
  • Development of the Right to Counsel    England’s early legal system did not include the assistance of counsel Po we ll v. A ba m a (1932) la  Denying legal counsel for a defendant at trial is a denial of due process G id e o n v. Wa inwrig ht (1963)  Held that not only was the right to counsel absolute, but also in all serious cases, indigent defendants accused of a felony were to be provided with legal counsel  Indigent defendants  Poor, unable to afford a lawyer
  • Development of the Right to Counsel  A e rs ing e r v. Ha m lin (1972) rg   The Court extended the right to an attorney to defendants accused of misdemeanor offenses. Any time the penalty could include prison, the defendant must have access to a lawyer Es c o be d o v. I is (1964) llino  When police inquiry has begun to focus on a particular suspect, custodial interrogation at the police station entitles a suspect to legal representation
  • Current Events THE ACCESS TO JUSTICE INITIATIVE    In March 2010 the U.S. Department of Justice established this to address the access-to-justice crisis in the criminal justice system The mission is to deliver outcomes that are fair and accessible to all, regardless of wealth or status Many agencies will work together to improve the services for those who are unable to afford lawyers
  • Right to Counsel at Critical Stages of Criminal Proceedings    The Supreme Court has held that no one may be imprisoned for any level of crime without legal representation, unless the accused has knowingly and intelligently waived their right 6th Amendment right to legal counsel occurs at every critical stage of a criminal proceeding, including during the investigation, at hearings and during the trial A critical stage is any step during a criminal prosecution where the accused’s rights may be affected by the absence of legal representation
  • Critical Stages during the Criminal Investigation  M s s ia h v. Unite d Sta te s (1964) a   Statements a defendant makes after being charged with a crime, would not be admissible is the attorney is not present Unite d Sta te s v. He nry (1980)  A defendant's 6th Amendment right to counsel is violated if police intentionally create a situation likely to result in incriminating statements
  • Critical Stages during the Criminal Investigation   The Miranda warning is meant to both safeguard the 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination, and To declare that a person who is questioned while in police custody has a 6th Amendment right to an attorney  The exclusionary rule will prohibit confessions obtained in violation of these rights from being used in court
  • Critical Stages during the Criminal Investigation Miranda    Applies only if the suspect is in custody Custody arises at arrest or equivalent physical restraint Does not prohibit undercover questioning Massiah    Applies either in or out of custody Attaches by indictment or first court appearance Allows passive listening, but not active undercover questioning
  • Critical Stages during the Criminal Investigation  Bre we r v. Willia m s (1977)  In holding that the Christian Burial Speech was a de facto interrogation the Court found it to be the functional equivalent of custodial interrogation  This case is often considered to be a 5th Amendment Miranda issue, but  It also stands for the rule of law that questioning of a person after adversarial proceedings have commenced against a person, they have the right to legal representation because it is a critical stage  There was deliberate elicitation of incriminating statements  The method used purposefully, yet covertly, produced
  • Rights during Identification     In addition to questioning people, police work involves identifying perpetrators in the course and scope of case preparation Eyewitness testimony is a valuable investigative tool However, mistaken eyewitness identification has been reported to play a role in more than 75% of the convictions that have been overturned by DNA testing Causes of misidentification:  Cross-racial identification suggests that people of one race have difficulty recognizing facial
  • Rights during Identification   Criminal procedure defines ways police identify suspects to victims or other witnesses Showup   Lineup   Identification technique in which only one individual is shown to the victim or witness Identification technique in which the victim or witness is shown several people, including the suspect Blind Lineup  One conducted by someone who does not know who the suspect is
  • Rights during Identification  Unite d Sta te s v. Wa d e & G ilbe rt v. Ca lifo rnia (1967)  Established the Wade-Gilbert Rule, that the Court held that pretrial lineups invoke the 6th Amendment protection and require that the suspect have a lawyer
  • Rights during Identification  Fo s te r v. Ca lifo rnia (1969)   Lineups may not be arranged in such a manner as to make the defendant stand out from the others in any unnecessarily suggestive ways Kirby v. I is (1972) llino  Pre-indictment identification procedures are not critical stages of criminal proceedings, so there is no 6th Amendment right to a lawyer
  • Rights during Identification  Factors to consider in determining witness reliability:      The opportunity of the witness to view the defendant during the crime The level of attention the witness was paying to the defendant The accuracy of any descriptions of the defendant made by the witness before the identification procedure The witness’s level of certainty in his or her identification The time between the crime and confrontation
  • Critical Stages at Hearings, Trials and Appeals  What events require counsel other than a trial?  Preliminary Hearing  When it is determined if probable cause exists to believe a crime has been committed and that the defendant committed it   Deemed a critical stage and thus the right to counsel attaches Arraignment  Usually the first court appearance by a defendant during which the accused is advised of his or her rights, advised of the charges and given the opportunity to enter a plea
  • Critical Stages at Hearings, Trials and Appeals  M o re v. M hig a n (1957) o ic   Established that a defendant has the right to counsel while submitting a guilty plea to the court Do ug la s v. Ca lifo rnia (1963)  Any hearing or trial through the first appeal of right invokes the 6th Amendment right to counsel  But does not extend to any additional appeals
  • Critical Stages at Hearings, Trials and Appeals  Bra d y v. M ry la nd (1963) a  Established the rules for “discovery”, making unconstitutional “trial by ambush” where the defendant learns the identity or prosecution witnesses when they walk down the courtroom aisle Rule- the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process  Brady
  • Critical Stages at Hearings, Trials and Appeals  Te x a s v. Co bb (2001)   The Court asserted that the right of counsel only applied to charged offenses The Supreme Court called this “offense specific”  Only applies to the specific charges for which the defendant has been indicted or arraigned
  • The Presumption of Effective Counsel  Po we ll v. A ba m a (1932) la   The 6th Amendment right to counsel presumes counsel is effective Effective counsel- “The proper measure of attorney performance remains simply reasonableness under prevailing professional norms…The benchmark for judging any claim of ineffectiveness must be whether counsel’s conduct so undermined the proper functioning of the adversarial process that the trial cannot be relied on as having produced a just result”
  • The Presumption of Effective Counsel  Stric kla nd v. Wa s hing to n (1984)  Established a two-prong test to establish a claim of ineffective counsel 1. 2. The counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness There is a reasonable probability that, but for the counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different
  • The Presumption of Effective Counsel  Unite d Sta te s v. Cro nic (1984)   Inexperience may not suffice as ineffective representation Failure to take normal and routine steps before and during trial could
  • The Presumption of Effective Counsel   If a lawyer has a conflict of interest by representing another client who would prejudice the other, ineffective assistance of counsel would exist Because the Stric kla nd decision places the burden to prove ineffective representation on the claimant, few appeals on such grounds are successful
  • Waiver of 6th Amendment Right to Legal Counsel   A suspect cannot be forced to deal with an attorney and so may waive this right Pa tte rs o n v. I is (1988) llino   Held that a valid waiver of Miranda rights not only waives the 5th Amendment right against selfincrimination but also waves the 6th Amendment right to counsel The requirements that a waiver be knowing, voluntary and intelligent remain the same
  • Waiver of 6th Amendment Right to Legal Counsel    A court will consider the totality of circumstances regarding how the waiver was obtained and the competency and age of the person As well as issues of intelligence, health and ability to understand the language For a waiver to be effective, it need no be in writing, but whatever statement is made by the suspect must show there was, in fact:  An intentional relinquishment of the known right
  • The Right to Act as One’s Own Counsel  People may elect to appear in court pro se     Appearing in court without an attorney, representing oneself Some defendants distrust attorneys in general Believe they can handle their defense adequately The expense of hiring a lawyer or not qualifying for legal aid compels some to defend themselves
  • The Right to Act as One’s Own Counsel  Fa re tta v. Ca lifo rnia (1975)  Set forth three conditions to be met before a person could represent themselves: Awareness of the right to counsel 2. A valid waiver of 6th Amendment rights 3. Competency An accused who represents themselves, cannot later claim ineffective counsel 1. 
  • Juveniles and the 6th Amendment  I re G a ult (1967) n  Established that the Constitution applied to juveniles as well as adults  Gives rights to juveniles including the right against self-incrimination  To receive notice of charges  To confront and cross-examine witnesses  Right to counsel
  • The 6th Amendment and Corrections   Like the 5th Amendment, the 6th Amendment is not frequently cited in prisoners’ rights lawsuits For prisoners, cases based on the 6th Amendment involve the right to a speedy trial and the detainer problem  Document filed against inmates who have other criminal charges pending against them
  • The 6 Amendment and Corrections th  M m p a v. Rha y (1967) e   Convicted offenders have right to assistance of counsel at probation revocation hearings in which sentencing has been deferred G a g no n v. Sc a rp e lli (1973)  Probationers/parolees have a constitutionally limited right to counsel on a case-by-case basis at revocation proceedings