Criminal Procedure
Crystal—Spring 2004
1. Criminal v. Civil Proceedings
Significance of classification as a criminal proceeding?
A criminal ∆ has more rights than a civil ∆.
Standard of proof: Beyond a reasonable doubt
Constitutional protections:
Right to counsel.
Invoke privilege against self-incrimination
Suppress illegally seized evidence
6th Amendment.
Ex. of where this issue arises: Sexually Dangerous Persons Acts – involuntary commitment of someone who is defined to be a sexually dangerous person, even after that person has served their time for committing that offense. The statutes say that it is a civil commitment. Under these statutes, the length of the commitment is typically indeterminative.
Kansas v. Hendricks:
Facts: the legislation was attacked on grounds that would apply to a criminal proceeding.
Ex post facto law: conduct already occurred, and then criminalized – shouldn’t apply to someone who committed the conduct before it was criminalized.
Double-jeopardy: Already convicted once – attaching a 2nd punishment for the same offense.
Issue: Was the statute, which provided for commitment even after he served his sentence, criminal in nature? If so, could raise defenses above applicable to criminal proceedings.
Holding: The court determined that the statute was civil. Test:
1) Legislature’s intent: wording of the statute – did the legislature expressly or implicitly classify this statute? – “civil commitment procedure.”
2) If legislature classified as civil, than is the statute so punitive in purpose or effect as to negate the state’s intention? Look at various factors, including the goals of the criminal process.
Retribution, deterrence, mens rea
Key point: Must make a very strong case to overcome the legislative determination that it is a civil v. a criminal case.
Looked @ purpose of criminal proceeding and the effects the statute at issue here:
1) Retribution – (statute at issue here not desig
to trial by jury applied to states
ii. Held: 14th A. guarantees the right of jury trial in all criminal cases
1. Whether the right infringed is fundamental to our concept of ordered liberty
2. “fundamental to the Anglo-American scheme of justice”
3. Can have a just system without having a jury trial; however, in our system of jurisprudence this is fundamental
4. Narrows the concept of fundamental liberty
iii. Views as to the relationship between Bill of Rights and 14th A.
1. Selective incorporation (Duncan): Case comes up raising the issue of whether state has to respect right, if so, then baggage of federal decisions apply
a. We have through accretion come to this
b. “Fundamental to concept of ordered liberty”
c. 2d A. has never been decided
d. Although most others have been incorporated
2. Harlan’s (Frankfurter): broader conception of looking at language of 14th A.; can go beyond Bill of Rights
a. Rights fundamental to ordered liberty
