skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 200916 Find in a Library
Title: Blurring the Line: Impact of Offense-Specific Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel
Journal: The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology  Volume:93  Issue:1  Dated:Fall 2002  Pages:195-225
Author(s): Melissa Minas
Editor(s): Matthew Burke
Date Published: 2002
Page Count: 31
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This paper examines the Supreme Court decision in Texas v. Cobb (2001), which held that the right to counsel is offense specific and attaches only to a charged offense and in Blockburger v. United States, which states that if a different fact is needed to prove the offenses, they cannot be considered the same offense.
Abstract: The history of the sixth amendment right to counsel can be traced back to Massiah v. United States, which was decided in 1964. However, the right to counsel arose out of both the fifth and sixth amendments. The U.S. Supreme Court had its first opportunity, in Texas v. Cobb (2001), to consider what constitutes an “offense” for the purposes of right to counsel. In Cobb, the Supreme Court held that the right to counsel, as provided for in the sixth amendment to the United States Constitution, attaches only to charged offenses, and there is no exception for crimes that are uncharged, yet factually related to a charged offense. It also held that when the sixth amendment right to counsel attaches, it encompasses offenses that would be considered the same offense under Blockburger v. United States. In the Court’s decision in Cobb, it failed to recognize the overall effect it would have on obliterating the sixth amendment right to counsel. Since suspects do not need to be represented by counsel with respect to closely related crimes, there is now ample opportunity for police officers to manipulate the charges brought against suspects in order to gain evidence admissible at trial. As police officers are forced to apply the Blockburger test in determining which offenses can be considered the same offense, the litigation on this issue will continue. The protections inherent in the prior sixth amendment right to counsel cases simply are not as effective as they once were.
Main Term(s): US Supreme Court decisions
Index Term(s): Arrest and apprehension; Attorney client relations; Constitutional Rights/Civil Liberties; Judicial decisions; Miranda rights; Right to counsel; Rights of the accused
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=200916

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.