Criminal Procedure: Adjudication
Terms in this set (58)
Duncan v. Louisiana
The 14th Amendment guarantees a right of jury trial in all criminal cases which, were they to be tried in a federal court, would come within the Sixth Amendment's guarantee.
Stack v. Boyle
Bail is excessive where it is much higher than usually imposed for offenses with simalr penalties and there is no factual showing to justify it. Petitioners can move for reduction of bail.
Bail Reform Act of 1984
Federal legislation that provides for both greater emphasis on release on recognizance for non-dangerous offenders and preventive detention for those who present a menace to the community
US v. Salerno
The Bail Reform Act is constitutional. The detention imposed by it is regulatory, not punishment, and it has a legitimate and compelling regulatory prupose and offers procedural protections.
Fed R Crim P 5
Initial appearance - (a)(1) upon arrest, D must be taken before judge w/o unnecessary delay; (3) upon summons; (b) without a warrant; (d) In a felony case (2) judge must allow D to consult w/ counsel
Fed R Crim P 5.1
Preliminary hearing - (a) If D charged w/ offense other than petty offense, magistrate judge must conduct unless D waives, D is indicted, gov't files information under 7(b), etc.
US v. Armstrong
A federal criminal making a selective-prosecution claim must show that the Government's prosecutorial policy is motivated by a discriminatory purpose, and that similarly situated individuals of a different race were not prosecuted.
Blackledge v. Perry
Where D invokes right to trial de novo after being convicted but the prosecutor then charges him with an equivalent felony, the potential for prosecutorial vindictiveness makes more severe charges a violation of D's due process rights.
Coleman v. Alabama
Unless D is represented, state is prohibited from using evidence obtained at the preliminary hearing.
Hoffman v. US
A witness who refuses to answer the prosecutor's questions at a grand jury proceeding for fear of self-incrimination need not explain why he can't answer the questions.
U.S. v. Hubbell
Production is a testimonial act
US v. Williams
A district court cannot dismiss an otherwise valid indictment where the Government fails to disclose substantial exculpatory evidence to the grand jury.
Fed R Crim P 6
Grand jury - (a) summoning; (e) recording and disclosing proceedings; secrecy
Fed R Crim P 7
Indictment and information - (a) Felony must be prosecuted by an indictment if punishable by death or imprisonment for more than 1 year
US v. Rodriguez-Moreno
Charge for carrying a firearm during a crime of violence can be applied in NJ even if crime in that state didn't involve a firearm.
- Efficiency - rather than having trial in MD / each location
Fed R Crim P 12
Pleadings and pretrial motions - (a) pleadings are the indictment, information, and pleas of not guilty, guilty, and nolo contendere; (b) a party can raise any defense, objection, or request the court can determine without a trial on the permits; (3) objection based on defect in indictment/information must be made before trial
Fed R Crim P 16
Discovery and inspection - (a) government's disclosure - what it must disclose. (b) defendant's disclosure - if D requests disclosure, D must allow government to inspect / copy documents
Fed R Crim P 26.1
Foreign law determination - party intending to raise issue of foreign law must provide court and all parties with reasonable written notice. Issues are questions of law, but court can consider any relevant material without regard to the Rules.
US v. Agurs
A prosecutor's failure to provide information to defense counsel will not deprive a defendant of a fair trial unless specific information was requested by defense counsel or if the withheld information contained perjured testimony.
US v. Bagley
Evidence is material only if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would've been different.
Smith v. Cain
In a criminal prosecution, evidence is "material" and must be disclosed to defense counsel when there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed, the result of the proceeding would have been different.
Arizona v. Youngblood
Unless a criminal defendant can show bad faith on the part of the police, failure to preserve potentially useful evidence does not constitute a denial of due process of law.
Williams v. Florida
(1) Requiring a criminal defendant to give notice of an alibi defense and disclose his alibi witnesses to the state prior to trial does not violate the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
(2) The Sixth Amendment does not require trial by a jury of exactly 12 people.
State v. Reldan
Separate crimes can be joined in 1 trial if they're similar in character, but not allowed where it could result in prejudice to D. D will not be embarrassed or confounded in presenting separate defenses.
Fed R Crim P 8
Joinder of offenses or defendants - (a) offenses: indictment or information can charge D in separate counts with 2+ offenses if they are of the same or similar character or are based on teh same act or transaction or part of a common scheme or plan. (b) defendants - indictment or information can charge 2+ defendants if they're alleged to have participated in the same (series of) acts or transactions. Ds can be charged together or separately.
Fed R Crim P 13
Joint trial of separate cases - court can order that separate cases be tried together in a single indictment or information if all offenses and Ds could've been joined in a single indictment or information
Fed R Crim P 14
Relief from prejudicial joinder - (a) if joinder prejudices D or gov't, court can order separate trials, sever Ds' trials, or provide other relief. (b) before ruling of D's motion to sever, court can order gov't to deliver D's statements to court that gov't intends to use as evidence.
Nix v. Whiteside
While counsel must take all reasonable and lawful means to attain the objectives of the client, counsel may not assist the client in presenting false evidence or otherwise violating the law.
Gideon v. Wainwright
The Betts court was wrong in finding that the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of counsel is not a fundamental right. The Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Sixth Amendment right to counsel to the states.
Scott v. Illinois
The Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments' requiring a right to counsel only applies where there is actual imprisonment. In other words, the Amendments require that indigent criminal Ds aren't sentenced to imprisonment unless the State has given the defendant the right to assistance of appointed counsel.
Douglas v. California
It is unconstitutional to deny an indigent defendant assistance of counsel on appeal.
Faretta v. California
A State may not constitutionally hale a person into criminal court and then force a lawyer upon him when he insists that he wants to conduct his own defense.
Strickland v. Washington / 2-Prong Test for Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
Any deficiencies in counsel's performance must be prejudicial to the defense to constitute ineffective assistance under the Constitution. D must show 1. That his counsel's performance was deficient because the lawyer did not act as a reasonably competent attorney, and
2. That he was prejudiced by the deficiency because there is a reasonable probability that, but for his attorney's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.
Fed R Crim. P 11
Plea bargains. (d): D can withdraw a plea of guilty or nolo contendere.
Requirements for plea
Must be knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. Must know what you are pleading to.
North Carolina v. Alford
A guilty plea can be accepted by the court even if D testifies that he's innocent.
Bordenkircher v. Hayes
The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment "requires that vindictiveness against a D for having successfully attacked his first conviction must play no part in the sentence he gets after a new trial."
Santobello v. New York
Where the prosecution makes a promise to D during plea negotiations, and it acts as an inducement to D to accept the plea agreement, the prosecution is bound by its promise.
US v. Brechner
The prosecution can retract its end of a plea agreement where D lies.
Taylor v. Louisiana
Women cannot be systematically excluded from jury panels from which petit juries are drawn (if the Sixth Amendment's fair-cross-section rule is to be satisfied in jury selection).
Ham v. South Carolina
When the defendant makes a timely request, a judge must interrogate potential jurors about any racial prejudice they may harbor per the Fourteenth Amendment.
United States v. Salamone
A potential juror cannot be excluded from the jury for cause on the basis of his membership in an organization that adheres to a particular view if the challenged affiliation is not shown to prevent or impair the potential juror's impartiality.
- Doing so would go against the fairness and integrity of the judicial process.
Batson v. Kentucky
The racially discriminatory use of peremptory challenges violates the Equal Protection Clause.
United States v. Thomas
If there is a possibility that the juror's opinion is shaped by the sufficiency of the government's case, a juror cannot be dismissed from a jury once deliberations have begun.
- This rule serves to protect those jurors who do not agree with the other eleven jurors from being wrongly removed from the jury. The rule also prevents judges from inquiring too deeply into the jury deliberation and helps to preserve the rights of the defendant to a fair and impartial jury.
Maryland v. Craig
A State's interest in the physical and psychological well-being of child abuse victims may be sufficiently important to outweigh, at least in some cases, a defendant's right to face his or her accusers in court.
Crawford v. Washington
Testimonial statements of witnesses not present at trial are admissible only where the declarant is unavailable, and the defendant had a prior opportunity for cross examination.
Michigan v. Bryant
Statements made to help police address an ongoing emergency are non-testimonial because they're not made for the purpose of creating a record for trial.
Taylor v. Illinois
Refusal of testimony is not a violation of petitioner's constitutional right to obtain the testimony of favorable witnesses.
Griffin v. California
Comment on the failure to testify violates the Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
- Such comment is equivalent to evidence.
Williams v. NY
The due process clause does not render a sentence void just because a judge gets additional out-of-court information to help him exercise his power of imposing the death sentence.
McMillan v. Pennsylvania
The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is not violated where a state statute subjects a convicted defendant to a mandatory minimum sentence, not exceeding that otherwise permitted without the act, if the sentencing judge finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a certain fact existed at the time of the crime.
Apprendi v. NJ
Any fact, other than a prior conviction, that increases the maximum penalty for a crime must be submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution.
Blakely v. Washington
Any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
North Carolina v. Pearce
When a criminal defendant is reconvicted of an offense after being granted a new trial, it is unconstitutional to deny credit for time already served and it is unconstitutional for the court to impose a longer sentence in the absence of a finding of conduct subsequent to the original conviction that will justify imposing a longer sentence.
Blockburger v. US
If two offenses require proof of an additional fact which the other does not, they do not comprise the same offense.
Missouri v. Hunter
When the legislature indicates that a D may be subject to cumulative punishment under 2 statutes, 5A isn't violated where D is tried and convicted of 2 of the 'same' offenses in a single trial.
Fong Foo v. US
A D cannot be retried for the same offense where a trial judge wrongly makes a directed verdict for acquittal without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause of the 5th Amendment.
Ashe v. Swenson
In both federal and state courts, when an issue of ultimate fact has been determined by a valid and final judgment, that issue cannot again be litigated between the same parties.