Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Appointed counsel (1)
- Batson v. Kentucky (1)
- Bias (1)
- Capital punishment (1)
- Constitutional violations (1)
-
- Death penalty (1)
- Defendants (1)
- Discretion (1)
- Discrimiantion (1)
- Due process (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 (1)
- Juries (1)
- Jurors (1)
- Law reform (1)
- Lawyers (1)
- Low income individuals (1)
- Native Americans (1)
- Peremptory challenges Voir dire (1)
- Poverty (1)
- Public defenders (1)
- Race and law (1)
- Racial discrimination (1)
- Right to effective counsel (1)
- Sixth Amendment (1)
- Sovereignty (1)
- Texas (1)
- Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010 (1)
- Tribal courts (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
The Right To Counsel For Indians Accused Of Crime: A Tribal And Congressional Imperative, Barbara L. Creel
The Right To Counsel For Indians Accused Of Crime: A Tribal And Congressional Imperative, Barbara L. Creel
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Native American Indians charged in tribal court criminal proceedings are not entitled to court appointed defense counsel. Under well-settled principles of tribal sovereignty, Indian tribes are not bound by Fifth Amendment due process guarantees or Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Instead, they are bound by the procedural protections established by Congress in the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968. Under the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA), Indian defendants have the right to counsel at their own expense. This Article excavates the historical background of the lack of counsel in the tribal court arena and exposes the myriad problems that it …
Performing Discretion Or Performing Discrimination: Race, Ritual, And Peremptory Challenges In Capital Jury Selection, Melynda J. Price
Performing Discretion Or Performing Discrimination: Race, Ritual, And Peremptory Challenges In Capital Jury Selection, Melynda J. Price
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Research shows the mere presence of Blacks on capital juries-- on the rare occasions they are seated--can mean the difference between life and death. Peremptory challenges are the primary method to remove these pivotal participants. Batson v. Kentucky developed hearings as an immediate remedy for the unconstitutional removal of jurors through racially motivated peremptory challenges. These proceedings have become rituals that sanction continued bias in the jury selection process and ultimately affect the outcome of capital trials. This Article deconstructs the role of the Batson ritual in legitimating the removal of African American jurors. These perfunctory hearings fail to meaningfully …