U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Trial (From Leading Constitutional Cases on Criminal Justice, P 822-890, 1990, Lloyd L Weinreb, ed. - See NCJ-125682)

NCJ Number
125694
Editor(s)
L L Weinreb
Date Published
1990
Length
69 pages
Annotation
This chapter presents edited versions of nine leading U.S. Supreme Court cases pertaining to trial procedures.
Abstract
The cases presented are Illinois v. Allen (1970), Estelle v. Williams (1976), Sheppard v. Maxwell (1966), Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia (1980), Pointer v. Texas (1965), Chambers v. Mississippi (1973), Taylor v. Illinois (1988), United States v. Agurs (1976), and Arizona v. Youngblood (1988). Illinois v. Allen addresses whether an accused can claim the benefit of the constitutional right to remain in the courtroom although he/she is so disruptive as to make it difficult or impossible to conduct the trial. Estelle v. Williams determines whether an accused who is compelled to wear identifiable prison clothing at his jury trial is denied due process or equal protection of the laws. Sheppard v. Maxwell considers whether the defendant was deprived of a fair trial because the trial judge failed to protect him from significant and prejudicial pretrial publicity. Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia examined whether the right of the public and press to attend criminal trials is guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution; and Pointer v. Texas addresses whether the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of a defendant's right "to be confronted with the witnesses against him," which has been held to include the right to cross-examine those witnesses, is also applicable to the States. The other cases presented pertain to due process rights, failure to identify a defense witness in response to a pretrial discovery request, the prosecutor's withholding of relevant information from the defense, and whether the State is required to preserve evidentiary material that might be useful to a defendant. 20 footnotes.

Downloads

No download available

Availability