Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
United States [4] that the circuit court's decision had been wrong, even though the circuit court had found in favor of the government. He urged the Supreme Court to vacate Knox's conviction for possession of child pornography; they remanded the case to circuit court.
The Supreme Court reversed the Colorado Supreme Court's decision to suppress the evidence, stating that there was no violation of the due process clause. In the words of the Supreme Court: Coercive police activity is a necessary predicate to finding that a confession is not "voluntary" within the meaning of the Due Process Clause.
Confession of judgment is a legal term that refers to a type of contract (or a clause with such a provision) in which a party agrees to let the other party enter a judgment against them. Such contracts are highly controversial and may be invalidated as a violation of due process by courts, since the obligor is essentially contracting away his ...
In the law of criminal evidence, a confession is a statement by a suspect in crime which is adverse to that person. Some secondary authorities, such as Black's Law Dictionary, define a confession in more narrow terms, e.g. as "a statement admitting or acknowledging all facts necessary for conviction of a crime", which would be distinct from a mere admission of certain facts that, if true ...
In Director of Public Prosecutions v.Labavarde and Anor, Neerunjun C.J. said that article 11(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 6(2) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms would be infringed if "the whole burden is ... cast on the defence by the creation of a presumption of guilt on the mere preferment of the criminal charge".
Case history; Prior: Franks v. State, 373 A.2d 578 (Del. 1977): Subsequent: Franks v. State, 398 A.2d 783 (Del. 1979): Holding; Where a warrant affidavit contains a statement, necessary to the finding of probable cause, that is demonstrated to be both false and included by an affiant knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, the warrant is not valid.
In this case, a defendant was subjected to rigorous interrogation methods, including being forced to sleep on the floor, resulting in a confession to having committed murder. The Supreme Court ruled that the confession was involuntary and reversed his conviction. Thurgood Marshall represented the defendant, Robert A. Watts, in Watts v. Indiana. [2]
Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that struck down the police practice of first obtaining an inadmissible confession without giving Miranda warnings, then issuing the warnings, and then obtaining a second confession.