CRIMINAL EVIDENCE: CHAPTER 1 & 2

EARLY METHODS OF DETERMINING GUILT OR INNOCENCE

...

THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

...

WHAT ARE THE THREE TYPES OF EVIDENCE?

1. RELEVANT EVIDENCE 2. RELIABLE EVIDENCE 3. COMPETENT EVIDENCE

STATE THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT'S RULE FOR LOST OR DESTROYED EVIDENCE.

A failure by the government to preserve evidence violates due process only if done so in bad faith, the evidence possesses some exculpatory value apparent to the government when it was lost or destroyed, and the defendant cannot independently obtain comparable evidence.

ORDEALS

A medieval method of proof that was an appeal to God to determine guilt or innocence.

COMPETENT EVIDENCE

Any evidence that is relevant and reliable and not otherwise excludable.

NORMAN CONQUEST

Battle of Hastings, 1066. Common Law.

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE

Codification in 1975 of common-law rules of evidence; applicable only in federal courts but the model for most state evidence codes.

Gonzales v. Raich, 125 S.Ct. 2195 (2005)

Commerce Clause gave Congress power to apply federal drug laws to wholly intrastate of use of controlled substances.

Thaler v. Haymes, 130 S.Ct. 1171 (2010)

Defines "clearly established rule" for purposes of habeas corpus review of state court criminal convictions.

FEDERALISM

Divison of power between state governments and the federal government, in which the federal government has specified powers delegated to it, with the remaining powers vested in the states.

PRESENTMENT JURIES

English forerunners to grand juries; gave information that crimes had been committed.

RELEVANT EVIDENCE

Evidence that is direct or circumstantial evidence that has "any tendency to make a material issue before the court more or less probable that it would be without the evidence".

RELIABLE EVIDENCE

Evidence that possesses a sufficient degree of believability- that is, the likelihood that the evidence is true and accurate.

EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE

Evidence that tends to show innocence.

HOW DOES FEDERALISM APPLY TO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM?

Federalism as applied to criminal justice means the federal government may pass criminal laws only in the specific areas delegated to the federal government by the U.S. Constitution. States have the power to pass criminal laws in all other areas, unless such laws conflict with rights protected by the Constitution.

Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614 (1998)

Guilty pleas must be knowingly and intelligently made to be valid.

Presley v. Georgia, 130 S.Ct. 721 (2010)

Held "public trial right to all aspects of a criminal trial, including voir dire.

Bond v. U.S., 131 S.Ct. 2355 (2011)

Held Tenth Amendment permitted individual citizens to claim federal statute violated principle of federalism.

Crosby v. United States, 506 U.S. 255 (1993)

Identified common law right to be present at criminal trial, and applied Rule 43 of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to prohibit in absentia trials for felony cases in federal courts if the defendant was not present at commencement of the trial.

LIST SOME DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE ACCUSATORIAL AND INQUISITIONAL SYSTEMS.

In the accusatorial system suspects cannot be required to testify, and the prosecution has the duty to develop evidence of guilt from other sources. In and inquisitorial system a suspect may be required to answer questions and provide information that may lead to his conviction.

HABEAS CORPUS

Latin name of the writ used to compel a government official, such as a prison warden, to show cause why the official is holding a person in custody. Habeas corpus is guaranteed by Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution.

COMMON LAW

Legal rules that evolved over many years in English and American court opinions.

U.S. v. George, 625 F.3d 1124 (9th Cir. 2010)

Necessary and Proper Clause permits Congress to make SORNA law applicable to require sex offenders to register even if they don't travel interstate.

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986)

Prohibited use of peremptory challenges to exclude jurors based on race of juror.

Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)

Prosecution must disclose potentially exculpatory evidence to defendant.

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RELIABLE, RELEVANT, AND COMPETENT EVIDENCE.

Reliable evidence is evidence that possesses a sufficient degree of likelihood that it is true and accurate; relevant evidence is evidence that has a tendency to make a contested fact more or less probable than if the evidence is not admitted; competent evidence is any relevant and reliable evidence that is not excludable for some other reason.

Uttecht v. Brown, 127 S.Ct. 2218 (2007)

State the four principles used to determine if a juror was properly excused for cause in a capital case.

County of Riverside v. McLaughlin, 500 U.S. 44 (1991)

Stated 48-hour rule for "prompt" probable cause hearing in criminal cases.

Carey v. Musladin, 594 U.S. 70 (2006)

Stated when the prejudicial effect of courtroom condition denies a defendant a fair trial.

STATE THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE BRADY RULE.

The Brady Rule requires the prosecution to disclose exculpatory information or evidence to the defendant, even if a request for such information or evidence is not made. It includes evidence that goes to the credibility of a government witness, such as evidence the witness had made inconstant statements to investigators. A violation of the Brady Rule does not occur unless the evidence withheld is material and a reasonable probability exists that the result in the trial might have been different if the evidence had been disclosed to the defendant.

IDENTIFY THE LIMITS OF FEDERAL JURISDICTION UNDER THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE CLAUSE.

The Commerce Clause power extends only to activities that affect interstate commerce, as opposed to activities that affect only a single state. It includes an activity that occurs in only one state, but has a substantial affect on interstate commerce.

IDENTIFY THE CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS FOR THE EXERCISE OF FEDERAL CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.

The Constitution gives the federal government power to pass criminal laws to protect itself, its property, and its employees and agents. It is authorized to pass laws, including criminal laws, in areas or activities that affect interstate commerce, including all "necessary and proper" laws that are related to interstate commerce. It also may pass criminal laws governing places outside the jurisdiction of a state, such as a federal territory, military base, and so forth.

THE MAGNA CARTA

The Great Charter signed by King John of England and his barons in 1215; created the first standards for arresting and imprisoning those accused of crimes.

EXPLAIN THE IMPORTANCE OF THE MAGNA CARTA.

The Magna Carta was an important limitation on the rights of English Kings, including how criminal trials were to be held. It profoundly influence the drafters of the Declaration of Independence, and served as the beginning point for many of the individual rights in the Bill of Rights.

IDENTIFY HOW THE U.S. SUPREME COURT MADE THE BILL OF RIGHTS APPLICABLE IN STATE COURT CRIMINAL CASES.

The U.S. Supreme Court made the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, applicable to the States through the doctrine of "selective incorporation." Using the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which is binding on the States, the Supreme Court over time incorporated the rights in the first 10 amendments into the Fourteenth Amendment, thus binding on the States.

FEDERALISM IN THE UNITED STATES

The United States uses a form of government based on division of powers called federalism, which was first presented to the original states at the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia.

BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT

The burden that the prosecution must meet in proving guilt in criminal cases; applies to every element of the crime charged.

BILL OF RIGHTS

The first 10 Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

THE ADVERSARY SYSTEM

The judicial system in which opposing parties present evidence, and an impartial judge or jury weighs the evidence; contrasts with the inquisitorial system, where the judge actively questions the accused and witnesses.

PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE

The legal presumption required in all criminal courts that the defendant is innocent until sufficient credible evidence is produced to carry the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

DUE PROCESS

The minimum procedural protections courts must afford those charged with crimes; guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

PROBABLE CAUSE

The quantum (amount) of evidence required by the Fourth Amendment to make an arrest or to issue a search warrant; greater than reasonable suspicion but can be less than proof or reasonable doubt.

BRADY RULE

The rule that requires the prosecution to disclose upon request evidence favorable to the accused.

EXPLAIN THE FUNCTION OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS.

The writ of habeas corpus is issued by a court and directed to a government official, such as a warden of a prison, to appear before the court and show cause why the person seeking the petition is being held. In federal courts the writ can be used to review criminal convictions from state courts, but only to determine if the convictions violated the U.S. Constitution or federal laws.

Holbrook v. Flynn, 475 U.S. 560 (1986)

Trials and judgements must be based solely on admitted competent, relevant, reliable evidence.

CUSTODY

Under police control, whether or not physically constrained.

Fry v. Pliler, 127 S. Ct. 2321 (2007)

When evidence that third parties may have committed the crime charged can be excluded, and the scope of review of such exclusions.

Miller v. Pate, 386 U.S. 451 (1967)

When use of false evidence by prosecution requires reversal of conviction.

LIST THE RIGHTS IDENTIFIED AND MADE AVAILABLE TO A CRIMINAL DEFENDANT UNDER THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.

While some individual rights in criminal prosecutions are identified in the U.S. Constitution, such as the two witness testimony requirement for conviction of Treason in Article III, Section 3, most individual rights are found in the first 10 amendments. Theses rights have been incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment at various times, most recently in McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S.Ct. 3020 (2010), where the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment's right to bear arms was made binding on the States under the Fourteenth Amendment.