Criminal Procedure 8 th Edition Joel Samaha Wadsworth Publishing
Criminal Procedure and the Constitution Chapter 2
Constitutionalism In a constitutional democracy, constitutionalism is the idea that constitutions adopted by the whole people are a higher form of law than ordinary laws passed by legislatures. Constitutions are permanent, general principles. Laws are detailed, constantly changing rules. The U.S. Constitution is the highest authority in criminal procedure; it trumps all other sources.
Constitutions Constitutions have six characteristics: 1. They are the highest form of law. 2. They express the will of the whole people. 3. They always bind the government. 4. They cannot be changed by the government. 5. They can only be changed by direct action by the whole people. 6. They embody the fundamental values of the people.
The Law of Criminal Procedure The U.S. Constitution is the highest authority in criminal procedure. The law of criminal procedure is based on the Bill of Rights. They are rules that the government must follow to: Detect and investigate crimes Apprehend suspects Prosecute and convict defendants Punish criminals
The Law of Criminal Procedure Equally important are the rules generated by the U.S. Supreme Court based on the Bill of Rights. We also learn about criminal procedure by looking at lower courts, such as the U.S. Courts of Appeal and the U.S. District Courts.
Criminal Procedure Provisions and the Constitution Most criminal procedure provisions are found in the following amendments to the U.S. Constitution: Fourth Fifth Sixth Eighth Fourteenth
Criminal Procedure Protections in the Bill of Rights Fourth Amendment Fifth Amendment Sixth Amendment Eighth Amendment Fourteenth Amendment The right to be free from unreasonable searches The right to be free from unreasonable seizures The right to probable cause to back up searches and seizures The right to grand jury indictment in federal cases The right against double jeopardy The right to due process in federal cases The right against self-incrimination The right to a speedy trial The right to a public trial The right to an impartial jury The right to have a jury made up of persons from the state and district where the crime was committed The right to be informed of the charges against the accused The right to confront witnesses against the accused The right to a compulsory process to obtain witnesses in favor of the accused The right of the accused to defense counsel The right against excessive bail The right against excessive fines The right against cruel and unusual punishment The right to due process of law in state criminal proceedings The right to equal protection of the law in state criminal proceedings
The U.S. Constitution and the Courts The supremacy clause and judicial review together establish that criminal procedure has to answer to the U.S. Constitution. All courts can interpret the Constitution, but the U.S. Supreme Court has the final word. U.S. Supreme Court decisions bind all other courts. States rules cannot violate the U.S. Constitution.
State Constitutions and State Courts Every state constitution guarantees its citizens parallel rights rights similar to those in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. States can raise the minimum standards of rights set by the U.S. Supreme court but cannot reduce rights below that standard.
Raising Constitutional Standards The Oregon appellate court gave students more rights against search and seizure in schools than the 4th Amendment does in a case called Oregon v. M.A.D. in 2008 where a student had been searched and the principal found marijuana on his person. The court stated searches under the Oregon Constitution do not depend on the privacy that one expects from the government [as in the 4th Amendment], but on the privacy that one has a right to expect from the government. (Emphasis added).
State Courts as a Source of Criminal Procedure Law State courts are a source of criminal procedural law in two types of cases: 1. Those involving the U.S. Constitution that the U.S. Supreme Court hasn t decided yet. 2. Those involving their own state constitutions.
Due Process of Law While the 14 th Amendment was adopted in the aftermath of the Civil War, its power greatly expanded during the due process revolution in the 1960s. According to the 14 th Amendment, states must provide due process and equal protection of the law. Procedural due process means fair process. Due process guarantees fair procedures for deciding cases.
Hurtado and Charging by Information Hurtado v. California (1884) the defendant Joseph Hurtado was indicted in a murder case without being charged by a grand jury. Hurtado argued that charging by information was unconstitutional under the 14 th and 5 th Amendments. The court rejected his argument (but later adopted the view in the 1960s, adopting the view of Justice John Marshall Harlan, the lone dissenter in Hurtado).
The Scottsboro Boys, Due Process of Law, and The Right to Counsel Powell v. Alabama (1932) nine black defendants, the Scottsboro boys, were charged with raping two white girls. With an alcoholic defense attorney, 8 were tried, convicted, and sentenced to death in a span of four days. The Alabama Supreme Court upheld the convictions, but the U.S. Supreme Court later overturned them because the defendants were denied due process of law.
Brown v. Mississippi, Due Process, and Coerced Confessions Brown v. Mississippi (1936) three black men were severely and repeatedly beaten until they confessed to killing a white man. After a one day trial, all three were convicted and sentenced to death. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the convictions. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the convictions, ruling that the confessions were anything but voluntary.
The Fundamental Fairness Doctrine Powell v. Alabama and Brown v. Mississippi established the fundamental fairness doctrine. According to this, states must provide two basics of a fair trial: 1. Notice to defendants of the charges against them. 2. A hearing on the facts before convicting and punishing defendants.
The Incorporation Doctrine By the 1960s, the majority of the Court came to reject the fundamental fairness doctrine, favoring instead the incorporation doctrine. This defined 14 th Amendment due process as applying specific provisions of the Bill of Rights to state criminal procedures. Fundamental fairness doctrine focused on general fairness, while incorporation focused on specific procedures.
Bill of Rights Provisions Incorporated (as of 2007) The Bill of Rights Provision Case Unreasonable searches and seizures Wolf v. Colorado (1949) Exclusionary rule applied to state searches and seizures Mapp v. Ohio (1961) Self-incrimination Malloy v. Hogan (1964) Assistance of counsel Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) Confront witnesses against the accused Pointer v. Texas (1965) Compulsory process to obtain witnesses Washington v. Texas (1967) Speedy trial Klopfer v. North Carolina (1967) Cruel and unusual punishment Robinson v. California (1962)
Equal Protection of the Law A constitutional command since 1868, equal protection protects people from being investigated, apprehended, convicted, and punished unreasonably. This is not the same as saying everyone must be treated exactly alike but the treatment must always be reasonable.
Violating Equal Protection of the Law To claim a violation of equal protections, defendants must prove two things: 1. Discriminatory effect The official action was based on race or some other group identity. 2. Discriminatory purpose The named official in the group intended to discriminate against the named individual because of race or some other group identity.