Criminal Procedure: Outline
DUE PROCESS:
· Bill of Rights: They did not apply to the states (Baron v. Balitmore). It applied to the Federal Gov’t. Our Criminal justice system did not exist at the time of the Bill of Rights were enacted.
o We had a system of criminal justice which applied to federal — no state and federal system at that point.
o This process came before we even had a system.
o Up to 1949 most of the provisions did not apply to the states.
· Southern Cases involving black defendants – significant issue as to whether or not those defendants were guilty of the crimes that were charged.
· Use the 14th applies to the state. Hurtado used 14th amendment also.
· There are two due process clauses 5th applies to federal and 14th applies to state (equal protection clause).
· In some of the earlier cases the court used the due process clause to say you can’t have a mob dominated trial (Moore v. Dempsey). Can’t beat a D to get a confession out of the them (Brown v. Mississippi)
DEFINING DUE PROCESS
Hurtado v. California: p. 80
· Before the race cases, we had Hurtado case… Due process means accuracy- secure innocent Δs from being punished. Hurtado we have another definition-
Facts: Hurtado was convicted of 1st degree murder, no indictment/ grand jury
Issue: H claims was that I was not indicted by a grand jury… that essentially says there is probable cause that this Δ should go to petit jury trial.
Holding: Unable to say substituting examining guilt by a magistrate instead of having a grand is not due process of law.
· Why was it equally fair? This process was a legitimately mandated procedure by CA which has been duly elected by citizens and this is how they wish to proceed. Nothing arbitrary about this…. Due process of does not have to webbed to state procedures. Applies across the board everyone is subject to the rules, the Δ had a trial.
· What is the majority in Hurtado asking to resolve this issue? Is this a good thing and are we the ones who should be deciding this? No, Legs should be making those decisions; language is not vague, proper rule of law and therefore, does not violate due process.
Definitions of Due Process:
· Accuracy (Race cases)
· Rule of Law ( Hurtado) – satisfies due process
· Bill of Rights (Harlan Dissent) (current definition of due process along with fundamental rights) Due process is a combination of Right and fairness which this case rejected.
· Fundamental Fairness- (I know it when I see it)
INCORPORATION
Duncan v. Louisiana: p. 93
Facts: Δ received no jury b/c he committed a misdemeanor
Issue: Whether this violated due process
Holding: The Constitution was violated when demand for jury trial was refused
· Why didn’t the court just say that this was a racial discrimination case?
· More than 6 months sentence you have to have a jury trial. Easier to this than address race so there are no conflicts.
Doctrine of Incorporation: Incorporate the bill of rights into the due process clause so that the provisions are applicable to the states. Search and Seizure is applicable to the states and so on.
· Hurtado is still good law… states can still charge Δs without indictment under the federal constitution! If you look at language of bill of right number of rights – treat them separately. States can make their own choices.
Two parallel systems: the federalist papers idea of double security be protected under federal and state constitutions. Can’t argue due process right to grand jury can argue right the indictment under NJ constitution! Double protection. Many of the provisions there are states counter parties.
The state cannot go below the Federal Constitution but the states can give greater protection!
· Scottsboro case: convicted tried without a lawyer.
· Rochin v. CA: Swallowed pills and Police had Doc force it up. How do we apply it? idea of fundamental fairness- if you establish a rule you should be able to know when we should apply it down the line? A part of this process is to educate government officials.
· Frankfurter says go out there and do what you need to do and we will let you know when it’s bad.
· Where is the distinction between making the capsules come up and butchering the Ds name in trial is different? Court said the stomach pumping was wrong, and the prosecutor’s statements in court were not fundamentally fair. Could this be arbitrary? Rochin was a violation but what happened in Darden was not?
· Bill of Rights- How do we know this is where we are?
THE RESIDUAL DUE PROCESS CLAUSE
Medina v. CA: p. 100
Issue: A Δ has a constitutional right not to be tried if you are incompetent. Question as to whether or not he is competent. Does the due process clause allow the state of CA to impose the burden of proving competency on Δ. Δ said he was incompetent. CA says whoever claims incompetency bears the burden of proving it.
The Bill of right gives criminal Δs all of the procedural protection that they need and the due process clause does not have any work to do at all.
Maybe the problem is Bill of Rights definition – the due process clause might just be too fuzzy. Can’t apply it from one case to another… Bill of Rights we know the definition of it’s easy.
Due process clause does not create a burden they looked historically at what the states have done… States seemed to evenly divided. States have the most experience in criminal matters.
Ok says we want the D to have the burden but has to be clear and convincing but less than beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issue of the difference between the burden of preponderance of the evidence and clear convincing evidence issue of degree. Don’t speak in terms of absolute they yield to other
auto confession.
· The Court treats this as a functional search, because had B not complied with the order the info contained in the invoice would have been confessed.
· Next Issue: Whether or not this search was unreasonable? Reasonable searches are valid.
· The US can seize stolen property, property law you don’t have any interest in the property- the person that the property is seized from has no interests.
· If property is subject to revenue laws that can be seized. Who has the greater interest in this property.
· Goods subject to execution, the judgment creditor is seeking property to satisfy the judgment that property can be seized to pay the creditor.
· Holding: Here, the court concluded this is not under the above categories.
· This is not criminal, the statute said that you can get two years in prison. The US can bring a criminal charge. Here, the US only brought a civil charge.
· The court overlaps the 4th and 5th amendments. They treat them as functionally applying. 1. This is not a traditional search 2. This is not a criminal case.
· The amendments come together to protect what? Privacy & Property combination of the two. These two things as this time can be tied together.
· Opinion: Privacies of Life. Citing to Lord Camden. The US has made them a witness against themselves by making them produce the invoices to use it to testify against them constitutes “unreasonable” search and seizure.
· Some of the language contained in Boyd the seeds of its own destruction: The Gov’t needs to regulate certain activities. For the US to regulate these activities the US needs Information! How are they are going to get it with Boyd? The very thing B was protecting subsequently becomes the things US wants to regulate and need to get access to that same information. ** How is the Govt going to know if you paid your fair share of taxes without requiring you to file taxes every year?
· At this point in time, individuals probably had their greatest protection against the govt intruding in their privacy and property. Boyd is incompatible with the way the country was moving. One thing US decided to do was to regulate property- Boyd gave too much protection that the US couldn’t get its hands on things it wanted and needed.
