Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that under the Due Process Clause of the Constitution of the United States, the prosecution must turn over to a criminal defendant any significant evidence in its possession that suggests the defendant is not guilty (exculpatory evidence).
Lester B. Orfield, A Resume of Decisions of the United States Supreme Court on Federal Criminal Procedure, 30 Ky. L.J. 360 (1942). Lester B. Orfield, A Resume of Decisions of the United States Supreme Court on Federal Criminal Procedure, 7 Mo. L. Rev. 263 (1942).
The Brady doctrine is a pretrial discovery rule that was established by the United States Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland (1963). [2] The rule requires that the prosecution must turn over all exculpatory evidence to the defendant in a criminal case. Exculpatory evidence is evidence that might exonerate the defendant. [3]
The U.S. Bill of Rights. Article Three, Section Two, Clause Three of the United States Constitution provides that: . Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have ...
The Supreme Court issued three more opinions on Friday, marking the first time the justices have weighed in on the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. ... so the Justice Department’s cases ...
the right of criminal defendants to confront witnesses Perry v. Louisiana: 498 U.S. 38 (1990) forcibly medicating a death row inmate with a mental disorder in order to make sure he is competent to be executed is impermissible Cheek v. United States: 498 U.S. 192 (1991) mistake of law is a valid defense to criminal tax evasion because of mens rea
A federal appeals court on Friday upheld a ruling that Oregon defendants must be released from jail after seven days if they don’t have a defense attorney. In its decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit ...
Absence of defendant's counsel at the time of his arraignment violated his rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Hoyt v. Florida: 368 U.S. 57 (1961) all-male jury in a woman's murder trial did not violate Fourteenth Amendment Cramp v. Board of Public Instruction: 368 U.S. 278 (1961)