Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Series

Criminal Procedure

Sixth Amendment

Institution
Publication Year
Publication

Articles 91 - 107 of 107

Full-Text Articles in Law

Lilly V. Virginia Glimmers Of Hope For The Confrontation Clause?, Richard D. Friedman Jan 2000

Lilly V. Virginia Glimmers Of Hope For The Confrontation Clause?, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

In 1662, in The Case of Thomas Tong and Others, which involved charges of treason against several defendants, the judges of the King's Bench conferred on a crucial set of points of procedure. As reported by one of the judges, Sir John Kelyng, the judges agreed unanimously that a pretrial confession made to the authorities was evidence against the Party himself who made the Confession, and indeed, if adequately proved could support a conviction of that party without additional witnesses to the treason itself. But -- again unanimously, and quite definitively -- the judges also agreed that the confession cannot be ...


Gideon's Muted Trumpet, Victoria Nourse Jan 1999

Gideon's Muted Trumpet, Victoria Nourse

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Once the darling of the legal academy, criminal procedure has fallen into disrepute. Thirty-five years ago, when Gideon was decided, criminal procedure was the flagship of constitutional law, criminal defense attorneys were heroes, and courts and lawyers were perceived as themselves agents of social justice. Today, there are still heroes. But the conventional wisdom, within the academy and the country at large, no longer associates criminal law or procedure with heroism. Indeed, in some quarters, criminal procedure has become the enemy. Increasingly, scholars urge revisionism, popular pundits brand procedural innovations as a loss of "common sense," and philosophers warn that ...


Beyond Admissibility: Real Confrontation, Virtual Cross-Examination And The Right To Confront Hearsay, John G. Douglass Jan 1999

Beyond Admissibility: Real Confrontation, Virtual Cross-Examination And The Right To Confront Hearsay, John G. Douglass

Law Faculty Publications

Part I of this Article describes how the Court turned the Confrontation Clause into a rule excluding unreliable hearsay, culminating in the 1980 decision in Ohio v. Roberts, in which the Court set out the "general approach" that dominates confrontation-hearsay analysis today. Part II assesses the application of the Court's exclusionary rule in the two decades since Roberts, a period during which the Confrontation Clause largely has merged with, and disappeared into, the law of evidence, in the process losing its significance as an independent protection for the accused in an adversarial system. Part III argues that the Court ...


Lilly V. Virginia: A Chance To Reconceptualize The Confrontation Right, Richard D. Friedman Jan 1999

Lilly V. Virginia: A Chance To Reconceptualize The Confrontation Right, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

In Lilly v. Virginia, the Supreme Court once again has the opportunity to grapple with the meaning of the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendmel).t. The basic facts of Lilly are simple, for they present the ageold problem of accomplice confessions. Three men, Gary Barker and Ben and Mark Lilly, went on a crime spree, during which one of them shot to death a young man they had robbed and kidnaped. Ben Lilly was charged with being the triggerman, and Barker testified to that effect at Ben's trial. Mark did not testify. But Mark had made a statement ...


Confrontation Confronted, Richard D. Friedman, Margaret A. Berger, Steven R. Shapiro Jan 1999

Confrontation Confronted, Richard D. Friedman, Margaret A. Berger, Steven R. Shapiro

Articles

The following article is an edited version of the amicus curiae brief filed with the Supreme Court of the United States in the October Term, 1998, in the case of Benjamin Lee Lilly v. Commonwealth of Virginia (No. 98-5881). "This case raises important questions about the meaning of the confrontation clause, which has been a vital ingredient of the fair trial right for hundreds of years," Professor Richard Friedman and his co-authors say. "In particular, this case presents the Court with an opportunity to reconsider the relationship between the confrontation clause and the law of hearsay." On June 10 the ...


Confrontation: The Search For Basic Principles, Richard D. Friedman Jan 1998

Confrontation: The Search For Basic Principles, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the accused in a criminal prosecution the right "to be confronted with the Witnesses against him."' The Confrontation Clause clearly applies to those witnesses who testify against the accused at trial. Moreover, it is clear enough that confrontation ordinarily includes the accused's right to have those witnesses brought "face-toface," in the time-honored phrase, when they testify.2 But confrontation is much more than this "face-to-face" right. It also comprehends the right to have witnesses give their testimony under oath and to subject them to crossexamination. 3 Indeed, the Supreme Court has treated ...


Truth And Its Rivals In The Law Of Hearsay And Confrontation (Symposium: Truth And Its Rivals: Evidence Reform And The Goals Of Evidence Law)." , Richard D. Friedman Jan 1998

Truth And Its Rivals In The Law Of Hearsay And Confrontation (Symposium: Truth And Its Rivals: Evidence Reform And The Goals Of Evidence Law)." , Richard D. Friedman

Articles

In this paper, I will look at the problem of hearsay and confrontation through the lens offered by this symposium's theme of "truth and its rivals." I will ask: To what extent does the law of hearsay and confrontation aspire to achieve the goal of truth in litigation? To what extent does it, or should it, seek to achieve other goals, or to satisfy other constraints on the litigation system? And, given the ends that it seeks to achieve, what should the shape of the law in this area be? My principal conclusions are as follows: In most settings ...


Prior Statements Of A Witness: A Nettlesome Corner Of The Hearsay Thicket, Richard D. Friedman Jan 1995

Prior Statements Of A Witness: A Nettlesome Corner Of The Hearsay Thicket, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

In Tome v United States, for the fifth time in eight years, the Supreme Court decided a case presenting the problem of how a child's allegations of sexual abuse should be presented in court. Often the child who charges that an adult abused her is unable to testify at trial, or at least unable to testify effectively under standard procedures. These cases therefore raise intriguing and difficult questions related to the rule against hearsay and to an accused's right under the Sixth Amendment to confront the witnesses against him. One would hardly guess that, however, from the rather ...


Scottsboro Boys In 1991: The Promise Of Adequate Criminal Representation Through The Years, Charles W. Wolfram Apr 1992

Scottsboro Boys In 1991: The Promise Of Adequate Criminal Representation Through The Years, Charles W. Wolfram

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


The Sixth Amendment Lives! A Reply To Professor Jonakait, Craig M. Bradley Jan 1992

The Sixth Amendment Lives! A Reply To Professor Jonakait, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.


Waiver Of Rights In The Interrogation Room: The Court's Dilemma, William T. Pizzi Jan 1991

Waiver Of Rights In The Interrogation Room: The Court's Dilemma, William T. Pizzi

Articles

No abstract provided.


Court-Appointed Attorneys: Old Problems And New Solutions, H. Patrick Furman Jan 1990

Court-Appointed Attorneys: Old Problems And New Solutions, H. Patrick Furman

Articles

No abstract provided.


Book Review. Right To Counsel In Criminal Cases By Sheldon Krantz, Et. Al., Patrick L. Baude Jan 1978

Book Review. Right To Counsel In Criminal Cases By Sheldon Krantz, Et. Al., Patrick L. Baude

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.


Competency To Stand Trial In Federal Courts: Conceptual And Constitutional Problems, William T. Pizzi Jan 1977

Competency To Stand Trial In Federal Courts: Conceptual And Constitutional Problems, William T. Pizzi

Articles

No abstract provided.


Achieving Prompt Criminal Trials In New York, W. David Curtiss Dec 1972

Achieving Prompt Criminal Trials In New York, W. David Curtiss

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

During the past two years there have been several significant developments in New York related to achieving prompt trials in criminal prosecutions. These developments, which include judicial decisions, administrative rules and legislative enactments, come into special focus when delay in the trial of criminal cases is attributable to calendar congestion and the need for additional personnel and facilities. This article will examine these decisions, rules and statutes, with particular reference to their relationship to basic principles of judicial administration.


The Citizen On Trial: The New Confession Rules, Yale Kamisar Jan 1967

The Citizen On Trial: The New Confession Rules, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Commenting on why it has taken the United States so long to apply "the privilege against self-incrimination and the right to counsel to the proceedings in the stationhouse as well as to those in the courtroom" - as the Supreme Court did in Miranda v. Arizona - this author notes that, "To a large extent this is so because here, as elsewhere, there has been a wide gap between the principles to which we aspire and the practices we actually employ."


Gideon V. Wainwright: The Art Of Overruling, Jerold H. Israel Jan 1963

Gideon V. Wainwright: The Art Of Overruling, Jerold H. Israel

Articles

During the 1962 Term, the Supreme Court, on a single Monday, announced six decisions concerned with constitutional limitations upon state criminal procedure. The most publicized of these, though probably not the most important in terms of legal theory or practical effect, was Gideon v. Wainwright. In an era of constantly expanding federal restrictions on state criminal processes, the holding of Gideon-that an indigent defendant in a state criminal prosecution has an unqualified right to the appointment of counsel-was hardly startling. And while Gideon will obviously have an important effect in the handful of states that still fail to appoint counsel ...