Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Admissibility (1)
- Appointed counsel (1)
- Betts v. Brady (1)
- Confrontation Clause (1)
- Crawford v. Washington (1)
-
- Criminal Justice (1)
- Cross-examination (1)
- Defendants (1)
- Due process (1)
- Gideon v. Wainwright (1)
- Hearsay (1)
- History (1)
- Lawyers (1)
- Low income individuals (1)
- Poverty (1)
- Probative value (1)
- Public defenders (1)
- Raleigh Case (1)
- Reliability (1)
- Right to effective counsel (1)
- State courts (1)
- Testimony (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
- Witnesses (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Legal History
Gideon V. Wainwright--From A 1963 Perspective, Jerold H. Israel
Gideon V. Wainwright--From A 1963 Perspective, Jerold H. Israel
Articles
Gideon v. Wainwright is more than a “landmark” Supreme Court ruling in the field of constitutional criminal procedure. As evidenced by the range of celebrators of Gideon’s Fiftieth Anniversary (extending far beyond the legal academy) and Gideon’s inclusion in the basic coverage of high school government courses, Gideon today is an icon of the American justice system. I have no quarrel with that iconic status, but I certainly did not see any such potential in Gideon when I analyzed the Court’s ruling shortly after it was announced in March of 1963. I had previously agreed to write an article for …
The Mold That Shapes Hearsay Law, Richard D. Friedman
The Mold That Shapes Hearsay Law, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
In response to an article previously published in the Florida Law Review by Professor Ben Trachtenberg, I argue that the historical thesis of Crawford v. Washington is basically correct: The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment reflects a principle about how witnesses should give testimony, and it does not create any broader constraint on the use of hearsay. I argue that this is an appropriate limit on the Clause, and that in fact for the most part there is no good reason to exclude nontestimonial hearsay if live testimony by the declarant to the same proposition would be admissible. I …