CRIM PRO Flashcards
violation of Miranda
A statement taken in violation of Miranda may be used to impeach the credibility of a criminal defendant if he takes the witness stand and gives testimony at variance with his previous admissions.
Brady rule
Under the Brady rule, a prosecutor has an affirmative duty to disclose to the defendant any material evidence favorable to the defendant, nondisclosure of such evidence does not violate the defendant’s due process rights unless the failure to disclose causes prejudice against the defendant (i.e., that there is a reasonable probability that the defendant’s conviction or sentence would have been different had the suppressed evidence been disclosed to the defendant)
peremptory challenge
A prosecutor is free to exercise peremptory challenges in any manner he sees fit unless such exercise violates the Equal Protection Clause. The Equal Protection Clause prevents the use of peremptory challenges for racially or gender motivated reasons. other than that its ok
Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination
Only testimonial evidence is covered by the Fifth Amendment privilege; physical or real evidence is not. For example : While defendant’s handwriting in itself is not testimonial, the defendant’s answer to the question would be, because he would be identifying himself as the person who wrote the note.
-It can be invoked in civil proceedings if the witness’s testimony can be used against him in a future criminal proceeding. Answer choice D is incorrect because the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies the Fifth Amendment to the states.
ineffective assistance of counsel,
In order to reverse a conviction on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must prove both that the lawyer’s conduct was not objectively reasonable, and that the ineffective counsel actually prejudiced the defendant.
Double Jeopardy Clause
The Fifth Amendment Double Jeopardy Clause provides protection against (i) a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal; (ii) a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction; and (iii) multiple punishments for the same offense.
!!However, when jeopardy has attached with respect to a lesser included offense (explained below) prior to the occurrence of an event necessary to establish the greater offense, the defendant may be subsequently tried for the greater offense!!!!
A preliminary hearing to determine whether probable cause exists to hold the defendant (i.e., a Gerstein hearing)
Generally must be held within 48 hours of the defendant’s arrest. There is no need to hold a preliminary hearing if probable cause has already been determined through a grand jury indictment or an arrest warrant.
Younger
Under the doctrine of abstention, a federal court may abstain from deciding a claim when strong state interests are at stake. Under the Younger abstention doctrine, a court will not enjoin a pending state criminal case in the absence of bad faith, harassment, or a patently invalid state statute.
Critical stages include
There is no right to counsel during an identification through a photo array, regardless of when the photo array is conducted.
Critical stages include: post-charge in person line-ups and questioning by a government informant (even if the defendant is not aware).
- Offense specific—does not prevent the police from questioning the defendant about other crimes that have not been formally charged
- Waiver—must be knowing and voluntary
Critical stages include: post-charge in person line-ups and questioning by a government informant (even if the defendant is not aware).
There is no right to counsel during an identification through a photo array, regardless of when the photo array is conducted.
Probable cause to detain
- Must be held within 48 hours of arrest to determine probable cause
- Fourth Amendment guarantees defendant right to be released if no probable cause
- No remedy if detention is unlawful (other than exclusion of evidence)
Competency
Defendant must comprehend nature of proceedings against him and have ability to consult with lawyer with reasonable degree of rational understanding to be competent to stand trial
Confrontation Clause and the hearsay rule
•
Out-of-court statements by witnesses that are “testimonial” are barred under the Confrontation Clause, unless the witnesses are unavailable, and the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine those witnesses
• Out-of-court testimonial statements are not barred by the Confrontation Clause when they are used for a purpose other than establishing the truth of the matter asserted
• Testimonial statements—the declarant would reasonably expect it to be used in a prosecution
• Non-testimonial statements—statements made for the primary purpose of assisting the police in the investigation of an ongoing emergency are not testimonial
Admission of confession (Suton rule)—by non-testifying co-defendant at joint trial against D violates Sixth Amendment
Any fact (other than prior conviction) that can be used to increase statutorily prescribed maximum must be charged in indictment, submitted to jury, and established beyond a reasonable doubt
The failure to abide by the above procedure is a violation of the defendant’s due-process rights under the Fifth Amendment and Sixth Amendment rights to notice and a jury trial, both of which are incorporated against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
The prosecution bears the burden of establishing that a defendant has waived his Miranda rights by a preponderance of the evidence
The prosecution bears the burden of establishing that a defendant has waived his Miranda rights by a preponderance of the evidence
The judge may not direct a verdict in favor of the prosecution in a jury trial.
In a criminal jury case, a judge may order a directed verdict only for acquittal; the power to convict is reserved to the jury. Consequently, although the judge could deny the defense’s request for a directed verdict, the judge could not take the case from the jury by granting the prosecution’s request
