Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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.
Affirming a criminal defendant's constitutional right to have a competency evaluation before proceeding to trial, and setting the standard for determination of such competence. BOR, 14th 1966 Pate v. Robinson: A hearing about competency to stand trial is required under the due process clause of the Constitution of the United States. [2] BOR ...
Moore v. Texas, 137 S. Ct. 1039 (2017), is a United States Supreme Court decision about the death penalty and intellectual disability.The court held that contemporary clinical standards determine what an intellectual disability is, and held that even milder forms of intellectual disability may bar a person from being sentenced to death due to the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel ...
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.
The responsibility to evaluate the credibility of eyewitness testimony falls on each individual juror, when such evidence is offered as testimony in a trial in the United States. [6] Research has shown that mock juries are often unable to distinguish between a false and accurate eyewitness testimony.
The U.S. Supreme Court Thursday evening also denied a request to stay the execution, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor writing in her ruling that the "Supreme Court is powerless to act without a ...
After a dramatic flurry of weekend court filings, the Texas House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee on Monday announced death row inmate Robert Roberson's testimony would be delayed until he could ...
United States (1985) Supreme Court case in which a 5-year-old boy was the only witness to a murder. [5] The boy's testimony was ruled as admissible on the grounds that he was "sufficiently intelligent", could "distinguish between truth and lies", and understand that he was "morally obligated to tell the truth". [ 7 ]