Αποτελέσματα Αναζήτησης
A case in which the Court held that the Sixth Amendment, as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment, requires that the right to counsel extend to the deferred sentencing and revocation of probation stage.
A case in which the Court MacDonald’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was not violated by the gap between the 1972 CID’s report recommending further investigation into MacDonald and the re-filing of those same charges in 1975.
McCoy v. Louisiana: The Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to choose the objective of his defense and to insist that counsel refrain from admitting guilt, even when counsel’s experienced-based view is that confessing offers the best chance to avoid the death penalty.
10 Ιαν 2024 · Smith v. Arizona. Share. Holding: When an expert conveys an absent lab analyst’s statements in support of the expert’s opinion, and the statements provide that support only if true, then the statements come into evidence for their truth, and thus implicate the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause.
20 Ιαν 2022 · The Supreme Court on Thursday sided with a criminal defendant who said his Sixth Amendment rights were violated at a trial during which he was convicted of fatally shooting a two-year-old boy. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the opinion for an 8-1 court.
McCoy v. Louisiana, 584 U.S. 414 (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held the Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to decide that the objective of his defense is to maintain innocence at all costs, even when counsel believes that admitting guilt offers the defendant the best chance to avoid the death ...
29 Ιουν 2009 · A case in which the Court held that the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment is triggered when the prosecution in a criminal trial seeks to present testimony by a substitute expert conveying the testimonial statements of a nontestifying forensic analyst.
