enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Giles v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giles_v._California

    The Court examined the history of the common law forfeiture right, finding that every case since 1666 required that the defendant intend to make the witness unavailable for trial. The Court noted that subsequent history also still required an intent element, with only a few modern exceptions. [3] The decision of the California Supreme Court was ...

  3. Chapman v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapman_v._California

    The California Constitution at the time said (in Article I § 13), "in any criminal case, whether the defendant testifies or not, his failure to explain or to deny by his testimony any evidence or facts in the case against him may be commented upon by the court and by counsel, and may be considered by the court or the jury."

  4. Gilbert v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_v._California

    Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263 (1967), was an important decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, which was argued February 15–16, 1967, and decided June 12, 1967. The case involved Fourth Amendment and Fifth Amendment rights, the taking of handwriting exemplars, in-court identifications and warrantless searches.

  5. Griffin v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffin_v._California

    Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609 (1965), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, by a 6–2 vote, that it is a violation of a defendant's Fifth Amendment rights for the prosecutor to comment to the jury on the defendant's declining to testify, or for the judge to instruct the jury that such silence is evidence of guilt.

  6. United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v...

    Case history; Prior: 647 F.2d 72 (9th Cir. 1981); cert. granted, 454 U.S. 963 (1981).: Holding; Respondent cannot establish a violation of the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees a criminal defendant the right to compulsory process for obtaining witnesses "in his favor," merely by showing that deportation of the aliens deprived him of their testimony, nor can he establish a Fifth Amendment ...

  7. Brady disclosure - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_disclosure

    Examples include the following: The prosecutor must disclose an agreement not to prosecute a witness in exchange for the witness's testimony. [4] The prosecutor must disclose leniency (or preferential treatment) agreements made with witnesses in exchange for testimony. [5] The prosecutor must disclose exculpatory evidence known only to the police.

  8. People v. Hall - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_v._Hall

    The People of the State of California v. George W. Hall or People v.Hall, 4 Cal. 399, was an appealed murder case in the 1850s, in which the California Supreme Court established that Chinese Americans and Chinese immigrants had no rights to testify against white citizens.

  9. Kastigar v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kastigar_v._United_States

    Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court decision that ruled on the issue of whether the government's grant of immunity from prosecution can compel a witness to testify over an assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.