Sixth Amendment/Exclusionary Rule Flashcards
Right to effective counsel
A suspect against whom formal criminal proceedings have been commenced has a right to effective counsel at any post-charge line-up or show-up, including sentencing. This right does not apply to photo identifications, or when police take physical evidence from a suspect such as handwriting samples or fingerprints.
Standard of effectiveness (6th Effect. Counsel)
To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must prove that counsel’s performance was deficient in that counsel did not act as a reasonably competent attorney would have acted, and that this deficiency was prejudicial such that, but for the deficiency, the result would have been different.
Attorney substitution (6th Effect. Counsel)
A court will allow the defendant to substitute his attorney if the interests of justice so require, taking into account any conflicts, the interests of the defendant and the court, and the timeliness of the request.
Self-representation (6th Effect. Counsel)
The defendant is permitted to knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel and represent himself.
Right to confront adverse witnesses (6th)
The Sixth Amendment allows a defendant in a criminal prosecution the right to confront adverse witnesses.
Compel testimony (6th Right to Confront)
The right to confront includes issuing subpoenas to compel testimony of an adverse or hostile witness, as well as to cross-examine hostile witnesses.
Testimonial statements (6th Right to Confront)
The prosecution may not admit testimonial statements by a third person against the defendant unless the declarant is available for cross-examination either at the time the statement was made or during trial.
a. Statements are nontestimonial when made in the course of police interrogation under circumstances objectively indicating that the primary purpose of the interrogation is to enable police assistance to meet an ongoing emergency, such as a 911 call.
b. Statements are testimonial when the circumstances indicate that there is no ongoing emergency, and that the primary purpose of the interrogation is to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution.
Joint co-defendants (6th Right to Confront)
Joint co-defendants can raise “right to confront” issues.
a. Confession of one co-defendant: Where two defendants are jointly tried and one of them confesses, the right to confront adverse witnesses prohibits use of that statement against the other defendant unless the statement can be redacted or the co-defendant who made the statement takes the stand and subjects himself to cross-examination.
b. Severance of joint trial: Where co-defendants are charged for the same crime, courts prefer joint trials for judicial economy, but will sever the co-defendants if a joint trial would result in substantial prejudice to one of the defendants.
Right to a jury trial
Criminal defendants have the right to a jury trial for serious offenses that have a potential sentence of greater than six months.
Waiver permitted of jury trial
The defendant may voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waive his right to a jury trial.
Number of jurors required
Juries must consist of at least six persons and can consist of twelve persons. a. Six-person jury: In a six-person jury, a unanimous verdict is required. b. Federal criminal trial: A unanimous verdict is required. c. Twelve-person jury: In a twelve-person state jury, only a substantial majority is required for a conviction.
Impartial jurors
A jury must be impartial, consisting of a fair cross-section of a community. A jury does not consist of a fair cross-section of a community if the defendant can prove that:
- The group alleged to be excluded is a distinctive group in the community;
- The representation of this group in venires from which juries are selected is not fair and reasonable in relation to the number of such persons in the community; and
- This underrepresentation is due to systematic exclusion of the group in the jury-selection process.
- Voir dire
During voir dire each side (not party) has unlimited strikes for cause (bias, prejudice, related to a party, etc.) and three peremptory strikes that may be used for any reason, so long as the reason is gender and race neutral.
Discrimination not permitted in jury pool
The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prevents the state or any state actor, including the court, from intentionally discriminating against a distinctive group in selection of the jury pool.
The right to a speedy trial
The Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial is viewed on a case-by-case basis with the court balancing the following factors:
- The length of the delay;
- The reason for the delay;
- The prejudice to the defendant as a result of the delay; and
- The time and manner in which the defendant asserted his right.
Right to a preliminary hearing
A defendant who pleads not guilty has a right to a preliminary hearing if probable cause has not been established, within 30 days of their arrest, unless he waives such right. (The rules for preliminary hearings vary among jurisdictions.)
The exclusionary rule
The exclusionary rule is a judge-made rule that prohibits the prosecution from introducing evidence obtained in violation of a defendant’s Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendment rights.
The exclusionary rule Standing required
The defendant must have standing to assert the exclusionary rule, such that the evidence wrongfully obtained must have been in violation of the defendant’s own constitutional rights and not any third persons.
“Fruit of the poisonous tree”
Evidence wrongfully obtained is inadmissible as the “fruit of the poisonous tree”— in other words, evidence that is found as a result of the original wrongfully obtained evidence.
“Fruit of the poisonous tree” exceptions
a. Independent source
b. Inevitable discovery
c. Purged taint
Independent source
The evidence obtained could have been obtained from an independent source separate from the illegal source;
Inevitable discovery
The evidence obtained would inevitably have been discovered by other police techniques, had it not first been obtained through illegal discovery;
Purged taint
There are a sufficient number of additional factors that intervened between the original illegality and the final discovery that the link is too tenuous, such that the intervening factors have purged the taint of the illegal discovery.
Allowed during civil hearings or parole proceedings: (exclusionary rule)
Illegally obtained evidence is allowed in civil hearings or parole proceedings.
