Select Page

Criminal Procedure
St. Thomas University, Florida School of Law
Soree, Nadia B.

Criminal Procedure 1 Outline

Professor Soree

Fall 2013

The underlined information is what went into the summary at the end. Just memorize those essentials. Case names do not matter (except Miranda, obviously).

I) Core Ideas

A) Due Process

1) “Rights Approach”

(a) Palko

(i) Double jeopardy

(ii) Can we still have a fair justice system without this right?

(iii) Test: Is the right fundamental to our system of justice?

(iv) Overruled by Benton

2) “Fairness Approach”

(a) Sheppard

(i) Did not receive a fair trial because of a media circus

(ii) Fundamental right of due process to have a fair trial

(iii) 14th Due Process Test for Trials: Can we have confidence in this verdict?

B) Right to Counsel

1) Powell

(a) Denied Due Process under 14th because they had a right to counsel

(b) In capital cases, indigent persons have a right to appointed counsel

2) Gideon

(a) Indigent defendants get an appointed counsel in all felony cases

(b) Adversarial system (due process) requires that poor people be appointed a lawyer

3) Douglas

(a) Indigent person has a right to appointed counsel on first, automatic appeal

(b) Everyone must be given a transcript of their trial

4) Argersinger

(a) Test: is the element fundamental to OUR system of justice?

(b) You have a right to counsel if you can be jailed for the crime

(c) All parts of the 6th Amendment must be observed in criminal trials, except for jury trials for punishments less than six months in jail

(d) Can have as few as 6 jurors, but anything under 12 requires a unanimous verdict

II) Interrogations and Confession

A) Development of Basic Doctrine

1) Brown

(a) Coerced confessions violate Due Process hearing requirement

2) Spano

(a) Totality of the circumstances test for involuntary confessions under the 14th

3) Massiah

(a) 6th Amendment right to counsel attaches when judicial proceedings are initiated against the person

(b) Cops may not deliberately elicit incriminating statements from a person through subversive means

4) Miranda

(a) 5th Amendment prophylactic for the constitutional right:

(i) Right to remain silent

(ii) Anything you say can be used against you

(iii) Right to have an attorney present during questioning

(iv) If you cannot afford an attorney, then one will be provided for you

(b) Must be in custody

(c) Must be questioned by cops

(d) Waiver must be voluntary: totality of the circumstances

(e) If a person requests a lawyer at any time, then questioning must stop

(i) Only a right to a lawyer

(ii) Lawyer has no right to the client

(iii) Has the right to counsel (5th Amendment) on any charge

5) Miranda Analysis:

(a) Was the person in (=) custody?

(i) No, stop

(b) Was it an (=) interrogation?

(i) No, stop

(c) Were warnings given?

(i) No, inadmissible

(d) Was there a voluntary waiver?

uestioning (bomb in area- exigent circumstances) and routine booking (weight, height- administrative)

(ii) Videotaped evidence

(b) Cannot ask the person to assert a fact or belief without Miranda warnings

(c) Routine booking questions do not count as Miranda violations

7) Connelly

(a) Without some sort of police coercion there is no 14th Amendment violation and the voluntariness of a confession is not affected by mental state

(b) Voluntariness deals with police action, not state of mind

(c) Miranda waiver must be voluntary (totality of the circumstances)

(i) Waiver assessed by looking for state action, same as involuntary confession

(d) Connelly is a fallback to the 5th and 6th Amendment triggers for involuntary confessions

(i) No judicial proceedings, no custody and no interrogation, no state action = voluntary

8) Fulminante

(a) Involuntary confession analysis done by looking at the totality of the circumstances

(b) 14th Amendment back in Connelly and applied in Fulminante

(i) Always there and requires no triggers

9) Dickerson

(a) Miranda is an added protection for people’s 5th Amendment constitutional rights that Congress cannot change by enacting statutes