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: 34439 Find in a Library
Title: REVOCATION OF CONDITIONAL LIBERTY FOR THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME - DOUBLE JEOPARDY AND SELF-INCRIMINATION LIMITATIONS
Journal: MICHIGAN LAW REVIEW  Volume:74  Issue:3  Dated:(JANUARY 1976)  Pages:525-554
Author(s): ANON
Corporate Author: Michigan Law Review Assoc
United States of America
Date Published: 1976
Page Count: 30
Sponsoring Agency: Michigan Law Review Assoc
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: THIS NOTE REVIEWS THE CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS RAISED BY THE FACT THAT PERSONS ON DEFERRED SENTENCE, PROBATION, OR PAROLE WHO VIOLATE THE CRIMINAL LAW MAY FACE TWO PROCEEDINGS: A REVOCATION HEARING AND A CRIMINAL TRIAL.
Abstract: TWO MAJOR QUESTIONS ARE INVESTIGATED IN THIS NOTE. FIRST, THE AUTHOR INVESTIGATES WHETHER THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHTS UNDER THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY OR DUE PROCESS CLAUSES ARE VIOLATED IF THE STATE HOLDS TWO INQUIRIES INTO THE ALLEGED CRIMINAL ACT. SECOND, THE AUTHOR DISCUSSES WHETHER THE DEFENDANT'S PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION IS ABRIDGED IF THE REVOCATION HEARING IS HELD BEFORE THE CRIMINAL TRIAL. THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES THAT THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY CLAUSE DOES NOT REQUIRE THE STATES TO ABANDON ALTOGETHER THE USE OF THE DUAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE CONDITIONAL LIBERTY CONTEXT. ON THE OTHER HAND, HE STATES THAT SOME OF THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY INTERESTS INFRINGED BY HOLDING DUAL PROCEEDINGS MIGHT STILL BE PROTECTED BY THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE. IT IS NOTED THAT THE DEFENDANT MAY SUFFER SEVERAL POSSIBLE INFRINGEMENTS ON HIS RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION BY BEING SUBJECTED TO DUAL PROCEEDINGS. THE AUTHOR SUGGESTS THAT THE STATE ACCORD THE DEFENDANT AT A REVOCATION HEARING USE IMMUNITY FOR ALL TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE HE PRESENTS, THUS ASSURING THAT NONE OF THIS EVIDENCE CAN BE UTILIZED BY THE STATE IN SUBSEQUENT CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS. THIS WOULD FURTHER THE STATE'S INTEREST IN ENSURING JUST REVOCATION HEARINGS BY ENCOURAGING THE FULL PARTICIPATION OF DEFENDANTS IN REVOCATION PROCEEDINGS. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)
Index Term(s): Parole; Parole hearing; Parolees rights; Probation; Probation hearing; Probationers rights; Revocation; Right against double jeopardy; Right against self incrimination; Right to Due Process; Rights of the accused; Suspended sentences
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=34439

*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.