Digital Commons Network^™

Edwards V. Arizona, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Drawing The Line On The Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel Defense: United States V. Decoster (Iii)

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Student Representation Of Indigent Defendants And The Sixth Amendment: On A Collision Course, Robert M. Hardaway

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

This article will review the parallel patterns of development of clinical education and the sixth amendment, highlighting areas in which the practices of the former either conflict, or contain the potential for conflict with the latter. An analysis will be made of the present legal status of law student representation of indigent criminal defendants, with reference primarily to constitutional and sixth amendment considerations, but also to such related matters as the confidentiality of student-client communications, law student professional responsibility, and the applicability to students of state bar disciplinary rules. Finally, guidelines will be proposed regarding the proper scope of student …

Constitutional Law - Sixth Amendment - Indigent Criminal Defendants - Right To Assigned Counsel - Misdemeanors, Patricia T. Galvin

Duquesne Law Review

The United States Supreme Court has held that the sixth and fourteenth amendments do not require a state to provide counsel for an indigent defendant charged with a crime for which imprisonment upon conviction is authorized but not imposed.

Scott v. Illinois, 99 S. Ct. 1158 (1979).

Constitutional Law - Sixth Amendment - Waiver Of The Right To Counsel, Anthony M. Bittner

Duquesne Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States has held that an explicit statement of waiver is not necessary to support a finding that a defendant waived the right to remain silent or the right to counsel guaranteed by

Miranda v. Arizona. North Carolina v. Butler, 441 U.S. 369 (1979).