enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Indiana v. Edwards - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_v._Edwards

    The Court had recognized these two rights on competency for some time. In Dusky v.United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960), and in Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162 (1975), the Court established the standard for competency to stand trial—the defendant must have a "rational and factual understanding" of the nature of the proceedings, and must be able to rationally assist his lawyer in defending him.

  3. 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 ...

  4. Confrontation Clause - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confrontation_Clause

    Quoting a 1828 dictionary, the Court explained that a witness is one who "bear[s] testimony" and that "testimony" refers to a "solemn declaration or affirmation made for the purpose of establishing some fact". [4] Nonetheless, in Crawford, the Supreme Court explicitly declined to provide a "comprehensive" definition of "testimonial" evidence. [5]

  5. Wrongful conviction of David Camm - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_conviction_of...

    In August 2004, the Indiana Court of Appeals overturned the conviction. The court cited the trial judge's decision to allow testimony from a dozen women who claimed they had affairs with Camm or had been propositioned by him, which unfairly biased the jury because the prosecutor didn't adequately connect those relationships with the murders.

  6. Davis v. Washington - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis_v._Washington

    Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States and written by Justice Antonin Scalia that established the test used to determine whether a hearsay statement is "testimonial" for Confrontation Clause purposes.

  7. Compulsory Process Clause - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_Process_Clause

    The Court wrote: A person's right to reasonable notice of a charge against him, and an opportunity to be heard in his defense—a right to his day in court—are basic in our system of jurisprudence; and these rights include, as a minimum, a right to examine the witnesses against him, to offer testimony, and to be represented by counsel. [9]

  8. 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.

  9. Baskin v. Bogan - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baskin_v._Bogan

    Lambda Legal filed Baskin v.Bogan in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana on March 12, 2014, on behalf of three same-sex couples, all women. Their complaint named as defendants Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller and three county clerks, with one of the county clerks, Penny Bogan, in her official capacity, as the first-named defendant.