Share This Page
Cartoons, -> Criminal Procedure Cartoons
Smith v. Texas cartoons image illustration picture
Smith v. Texas

Description:
See also similar holdings in Abdul-Kabir v. Quarterman and Brewer v. Quarterman.

Select Usage (details) :



Probable Cause cartoons image illustration picture
Probable Cause

Description:
Brendlin v. California; fruit of the poisonous tree; officers did not have probable cause to stop vehicle, passenger was seized and evidence discovered as result was inadmissible.

Select Usage (details) :



Detain Aliens cartoons image illustration picture
Detain Aliens

Description:
Demore v. Kim; aliens may be detained pending removal deportation.

Select Usage (details) :



Miller-El v. Dretke cartoons image illustration picture
Miller-El v. Dretke

Description:
Peremptory challenge; juror discrimination; racial discrimination; Batson v. Kentucky, Johnson v. California.

Select Usage (details) :



Adamson v. California cartoons image illustration picture
Adamson v. California

Description:
The fifth amendment's protection against self incrimination; state prosecutions; through the fourteenth amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



Arizona v. Fulminante cartoons image illustration picture
Arizona v. Fulminante

Description:
Harmless error rule; admission of a coerced confession; warrant re-trial; stare decisis.

Select Usage (details) :



Bell v. Cone cartoons image illustration picture
Bell v. Cone

Description:
Death penalty; capital punishment; death row; actions of defense counsel are presumed reasonable; capital offense; defense attorney; defense strategy.

Select Usage (details) :



Berkemer v. McCarty cartoons image illustration picture
Berkemer v. McCarty

Description:
Custodial interrogation; noncustodial interrogation; ordinary traffic stops do not give rise to a need for miranda warnings.

Select Usage (details) :



Board of Education v. Earls cartoons image illustration picture
Board of Education v. Earls

Description:
Suspicionless drug testing of public school students involved in extracurricular activities is a reasonable; special needs analysis.

Select Usage (details) :



Douglas v. California cartoons image illustration picture
Douglas v. California

Description:
Indigent defendants are entitled to counsel for the first appeal as of right; ex parte; in forma pauperis.

Select Usage (details) :



Faretta v. California cartoons image illustration picture
Faretta v. California

Description:
Sixth amendment; defendant has the right to represent himself at trial, as long as his decision to do so is voluntary and intelligent. pro se.

Select Usage (details) :



Florida v. Bostick cartoons image illustration picture
Florida v. Bostick

Description:
Bus searches are not necessarily an unreasonable restraint on a passenger s freedom; randomly; an individual's freedom to leave.

Select Usage (details) :



Gideon v. Wainwright cartoons image illustration picture
Gideon v. Wainwright

Description:
Right to counsel; state court felony defendants are entitled to counsel; indigent defendants charged with felonies in state court proceedings have the right to have counsel appointed for them.

Select Usage (details) :



Horton v. California cartoons image illustration picture
Horton v. California

Description:
Warrantless seizure of evidence of a crime found in plain view should not be prohibited by the fourth amendment, plain view" doctrine.

Select Usage (details) :



Lisenba v. California cartoons image illustration picture
Lisenba v. California

Description:
Coerced confession was allowed in death penalty case.

Select Usage (details) :



Mapp v. Ohio cartoons image illustration picture
Mapp v. Ohio

Description:
All evidence obtained by unreasonable searches and seizures in violation of the fourth amendment is inadmissible in state court; overrules wolf v. colorado; stare decisis.

Select Usage (details) :



Maryland v. Buie cartoons image illustration picture
Maryland v. Buie

Description:
Protective sweep of a dwelling is valid pursuant to a lawful arrest; reasonable suspicion that there is some danger; protective sweeps.

Select Usage (details) :



Maryland v. Craig cartoons image illustration picture
Maryland v. Craig

Description:
The confrontation clause; protect a child witness from trauma; testifying in the physical presence of the defendant, ensures the reliability of the evidence; rigorous adversarial testing; essence of effective confrontation; cross examination.

Select Usage (details) :



Michigan v. Long cartoons image illustration picture
Michigan v. Long

Description:
Terry frisk of an automobile for weapons; search of the passenger compartment; reasonable belief, based on specific and articulable facts and the rational inferences; gain immediate control of weapons.

Select Usage (details) :



Miranda v. Arizona cartoons image illustration picture
Miranda v. Arizona

Description:
Custodial interrogation; duress; exculpatory evidence; inculpatory evidence; miranda rule; right against self incrimination; defendants must be informed of their rights prior to interrogation; used against the defendant at trial; right to remain silent.

Select Usage (details) :



Missouri v. Hunter cartoons image illustration picture
Missouri v. Hunter

Description:
Concurrent sentence; cumulative sentence; same offense; defendants may be sentenced in a single trial under mutltiple statutes proscribing the same conduct; cumulative punishment.

Select Usage (details) :



North Carolina v. Butler cartoons image illustration picture
North Carolina v. Butler

Description:
Express waiver; implied waiver; waiver of counsel; waiver may also be inferred by the words or conduct of the suspect.

Select Usage (details) :



Oregon v. Mathiason cartoons image illustration picture
Oregon v. Mathiason

Description:
Miranda warnings are not required in noncustodial interrogations; custodial setting; custodial interrogation.

Select Usage (details) :



Spano v. New York cartoons image illustration picture
Spano v. New York

Description:
Confessions obtained by relentless questioning and plays for sympathy violate due process; police pressure; not voluntary.

Select Usage (details) :



Strickland v. Washington cartoons image illustration picture
Strickland v. Washington

Description:
Ineffective assistance of counsel; Yarborough v. Gentry; reversal of a conviction or sentence; deficiency was prejudicial to the defense; mitigating circumstance.

Select Usage (details) :



Terry v. Ohio cartoons image illustration picture
Terry v. Ohio

Description:
Police may stop and frisk someone reasonably believed to have committed a crime; reasonable suspicion that a suspect has committed a crime or is about to commit a crime; detain him briefly for questioning; carrying a dangerous weapon.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Arvizu cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Arvizu

Description:
Reasonable suspicion is based on all the surrounding circumstances; totality of the circumstances surrounding a stop.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Dougherty cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Dougherty

Description:
Jury nullification remains an important component of american justice; prerogative of the jury after considering the facts and law presented.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Dunnigan cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Dunnigan

Description:
Sentences may be enhanced based on perjury; sentence enhancement; defendant's right to testify on his or her own behalf; sentencing guidelines.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Goba cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Goba

Description:
Risk of flight; detained pre trial; pretrial detention is justified if the court finds that no conditions imposed on the defendant will assure the defendant's appearance and the safety of the community.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Salamone cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Salamone

Description:
Challenge for cause; striking jurors for cause on the basis of their nra membership was an abuse of discretion; impartial.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Mendenhall cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Mendenhall

Description:
If a reasonable person would believe she was free to leave, there was no seizure a person is seized when, in light of the circumstances, a reasonable person would have believed that she was no longer free to leave. Seizure.

Select Usage (details) :



Warden v. Hayden cartoons image illustration picture
Warden v. Hayden

Description:
Police may conduct a warrantless search of a building when in hot pursuit; exigency.

Select Usage (details) :



Weeks v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Weeks v. United States

Description:
Obtaining evidence without a search warrant may violate the exclusionary rule amendment; the fourth amendment forbids federal officers from obtaining evidence through unreasonable searches and seizures.

Select Usage (details) :



Wong Sun v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Wong Sun v. United States

Description:
Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine; independent source rule; prophylactic; evidence that is so attenuated from the original unlawful conduct as to dissipate the taint is admissible.

Select Usage (details) :



Palko v. Connecticut cartoons image illustration picture
Palko v. Connecticut

Description:
Double jeopardy, fifth amendment prohibition does not apply to the states through the fourteenth amendment, only rights implicit in the concept of ordered liberty are applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



Wolf v. Colorado cartoons image illustration picture
Wolf v. Colorado

Description:
Due process, fourth amendment, unreasonable searches and seizures, exclusion of all evidence obtained by an unreasonable search is not required by due process .

Select Usage (details) :



Duncan v. Louisiana cartoons image illustration picture
Duncan v. Louisiana

Description:
Sixth amendment right to a jury trial for criminal defendents is incorporated to the states by the fourteenth amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Leon cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Leon

Description:
Exclusionary rule limited by good faith exception, evidence seized by law enforcement acting in reasonable reliance on a search warrant issued by a detached and neutral magistrate is admissible, even if found unsupported by probable cause.

Select Usage (details) :



Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole v. Scott cartoons image illustration picture
Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole v. Scott

Description:
Exclusionary rule does not apply at parole revocation hearings, evidence seized in violation of fourth amendment unreasonable search and seizure prohibition may be introduced.

Select Usage (details) :



Katz v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Katz v. United States

Description:
Wiretap in public phone booth violates fourth amendment, right of privacy protects all communications that a person does not knowingly expose to the public.

Select Usage (details) :



California v. Greenwood cartoons image illustration picture
California v. Greenwood

Description:
Trash on curb may be searched without a warrant, warrantless search allowed since there is no reasonable expectation of privacy.

Select Usage (details) :



Florida v. Riley cartoons image illustration picture
Florida v. Riley

Description:
Surveillance from airspace above a residence does not constitute a search for which a warrant is required under the fourth amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Karo cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Karo

Description:
Seizure of property requires meaningful interference with a possessory interest; installing a beeper in a container before possession is not a seizure.

Select Usage (details) :



Kyllo v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Kyllo v. United States

Description:
Thermal imaging to obtain evidence from a private residence is a search; use of a device not used by the general public to obtain evidence emanating from the interior of a residence constitutes a search.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. White cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. White

Description:
Electronic surveillance evidence obtained with informant consent is admissible; a person bears the risk that communications with another regarding criminal activities will be transmitted, electronically or otherwise, to government agents.

Select Usage (details) :



Zurcher v. Stanford Daily cartoons image illustration picture
Zurcher v. Stanford Daily

Description:
Freedom of the press; the press is not immune from a valid search warrant; a warrant may issue to search any property, regardless of whether the occupant is suspected of a crime.

Select Usage (details) :



Spinelli v.  United States cartoons image illustration picture
Spinelli v. United States

Description:
Probable cause; informant must have reliable knowledge of the subject matter of his tip in order for a search warrant based on the tip to be valid.

Select Usage (details) :



Illinois v.  Gates cartoons image illustration picture
Illinois v. Gates

Description:
Corroboration veracity; probable cause for a warrant resulting from an anonymous informant's tip is based on the totality of the circumstances; probable cause is not a mechanical, technical concept.

Select Usage (details) :



Maryland v. Pringle cartoons image illustration picture
Maryland v. Pringle

Description:
Reasonable suspicion establishes probable cause; lawful arrest; motion to suppress.

Select Usage (details) :



Maryland v. Garrison cartoons image illustration picture
Maryland v. Garrison

Description:
Good faith factual mistakes do not invalidate an otherwise valid search warrant; police officers have lattitude in executing valid search warrants.

Select Usage (details) :



Richards v.  Wisconsin cartoons image illustration picture
Richards v. Wisconsin

Description:
Knock and announce; police must knock and announce their presence prior to executing a search warrant unless they demonstrate reasonable suspicion that it would be dangerous or futile or would result in destruction of evidence of the crime.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Watson cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Watson

Description:
Exigent circumstances; felony arrests may be made solely on the basis of probable cause, without a warrant; statue authorizing warrantless felony arrests is constitutional.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Robinson cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Robinson

Description:
Search incident to lawful arrest; police may search arrestee for weapons or evidence regardless of insignificance of arrest; protective search.

Select Usage (details) :



Whren v.  United States cartoons image illustration picture
Whren v. United States

Description:
Pretextual stop; police stops need only be supported by probably cause; temporary detention of a motorist who the police have probable cause to believe has committed a civil traffic violation is consistent with the fourth amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



Atwater v. City of Lago Vista cartoons image illustration picture
Atwater v. City of Lago Vista

Description:
Warrantless arrest permitted even for a misdemeanor or infraction punishable only by a fine; if an officer has probable cause to believe that a person has committed a very minor criminal offense, the officer may arrest that person without a warrant.

Select Usage (details) :



Tennessee v. Garner cartoons image illustration picture
Tennessee v. Garner

Description:
Deadly force to prevent felony suspect's escape violates fourth amendment unless officers have probable cause to believe that the suspect presents a threat to the life or safety of the officers or others.

Select Usage (details) :



Payton v.  New York cartoons image illustration picture
Payton v. New York

Description:
Arrest warrant is required to arrest a person in his or her home.

Select Usage (details) :



Chimel v. California cartoons image illustration picture
Chimel v. California

Description:
Immediate reach search permitted pursuant to a lawful arrest; the police may conduct a search of any area within the immediate reach of the accused criminal.

Select Usage (details) :



Vale v. Louisiana cartoons image illustration picture
Vale v. Louisiana

Description:
Search incident to lawful arrest does not include the search of a house when the arrest occurred outside of the house; search must be substantially contemporaneous with the arrest and confined to the immediate vicinity of the arrest.

Select Usage (details) :



California v.  Carney cartoons image illustration picture
California v. Carney

Description:
Homeless living in vehicle still subject to the automobile vehicle search exception to the warrant requirement; warrantless searches of readily movable vehicles are not unreasonable when probable cause supports the search.

Select Usage (details) :



Thornton v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Thornton v. United States

Description:
Police officer may search vehicle incident to lawful arrest once probable cause exists to arrest recent occupant of vehicle who had access to interior of vehicle. search

Select Usage (details) :



Knowles v. Iowa cartoons image illustration picture
Knowles v. Iowa

Description:
Officer may not search vehicle incident to citation.

Select Usage (details) :



California v.  Acevedo cartoons image illustration picture
California v. Acevedo

Description:
Police may search automobile and containers within it if they have probable cause to believe contraband or evidence is contained therein. Stare decisis.

Select Usage (details) :



Wyoming v. Houghton cartoons image illustration picture
Wyoming v. Houghton

Description:
Police officers with probable cause to search car may inspect passengers belongings found in car that are capable of concealing object of search.

Select Usage (details) :



Colorado v. Bertine cartoons image illustration picture
Colorado v. Bertine

Description:
Routine inventory search is not criminal investigation and does not require warrant or probable cause.

Select Usage (details) :



Florida v. J.L. cartoons image illustration picture
Florida v. J.L.

Description:
Anonymous tip that does not bear any indicia of reliability does not justify a stop and frisk search.

Select Usage (details) :



Illinois v. Wardlow cartoons image illustration picture
Illinois v. Wardlow

Description:
Flight from police is not indicative of wrongdoing, but it is certainly suggestive of such.

Select Usage (details) :



Florida v. Royer cartoons image illustration picture
Florida v. Royer

Description:
When officers have reasonable suspicion that person has committed crime or is about to commit crime, they may temporarily detain individual for questioning no longer than necessary to serve purposes of stop.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Drayton cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Drayton

Description:
There is no seizure of person if police officer does not do anything to suggest to reasonable person that he or she is not free to terminate encounter.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Place cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Place

Description:
Police dog; drug dog sniff luggage; K-9 dog; investigative detention; when officer's observations lead him reasonably to believe that luggage contains narcotics, officer may detain luggage briefly to investigate circumstances that aroused his suspicion. C

Select Usage (details) :



Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls cartoons image illustration picture
Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls

Description:
Suspicionless drug testing of public school students involved in extracurricular activities is reasonable means of furthering schools interest in preventing and deterring drug use. special needs analysis.

Select Usage (details) :



Schneckloth v. Bustamonte cartoons image illustration picture
Schneckloth v. Bustamonte

Description:
Individual need not be informed that he has right to refuse consent to search before his consent to search will be considered voluntary. Sine qua non.

Select Usage (details) :



Illinois v. Rodriguez cartoons image illustration picture
Illinois v. Rodriguez

Description:
If law enforcement officers have reason to believe individual giving consent to search has authority over premises to be searched, then entry will be validated even if it is later determined that person did not have authority to consent. Resident.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Russell cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Russell

Description:
Entrapment defense prohibits law enforcement officers from instigating criminal act by persons otherwise innocent in order to lure them to its commission and punish them. Entrapment predisposition.

Select Usage (details) :



Jacobson v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Jacobson v. United States

Description:
Predisposition to broad range of conduct does not demonstrate predisposition to commit specific acts falling within that range.

Select Usage (details) :



Betts v. Brady cartoons image illustration picture
Betts v. Brady

Description:
Fourteenth amendment does not command state court to appoint counsel to represent criminal defendant in every case. due process incorporation sixth amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



Alabama v. Shelton cartoons image illustration picture
Alabama v. Shelton

Description:
Indigent misdemeanor defendant is entitled to appointed counsel at criminal trial when suspended sentence of imprisonment may later be enforced upon revocation of probation. Misdemeanor probation suspended sentence.

Select Usage (details) :



Ross v. Moffitt cartoons image illustration picture
Ross v. Moffitt

Description:
Criminal defendant does not have constitutional right to appointed counsel to assist in pursuing discretionary appeal in state court or petition for certiorari in supreme court of united states. discretionary review.

Select Usage (details) :



Ashcraft v. Tennessee cartoons image illustration picture
Ashcraft v. Tennessee

Description:
Constitution does not permit conviction based on coerced confession.

Select Usage (details) :



Watts v. Indiana cartoons image illustration picture
Watts v. Indiana

Description:
Relentless, systematic police questioning producing confession violates due process clause. due process inquisition.

Select Usage (details) :



Massiah v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Massiah v. United States

Description:
Sixth amendment prohibits government interrogation of defendant after indictment outside presence of counsel. Sixth amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



Escobedo v. Illinois cartoons image illustration picture
Escobedo v. Illinois

Description:
Right to counsel. when police investigation is no longer general inquiry into unsolved crime but focuses on particular suspect in police custody, must allow opportunity to consult with lawyer or warn of absolute constitutional right to remain silent.

Select Usage (details) :



Yarborough v. Alvarado cartoons image illustration picture
Yarborough v. Alvarado

Description:
Whether suspect is in custody under miranda is determined objectively by how reasonable person in the suspect's situation would understand ability to terminate questioning and leave custody.

Select Usage (details) :



Rhode Island v. Innis cartoons image illustration picture
Rhode Island v. Innis

Description:
For purposes of Miranda, interrogation occurs when police either expressly question suspect in custody or engage in any actions or dialogue that police should know is reasonably likely to elicit incriminating response from suspect.

Select Usage (details) :



Illinois v. Perkins cartoons image illustration picture
Illinois v. Perkins

Description:
Miranda warnings are not required when the suspect is unaware that he is speaking to a law enforcement officer and gives a voluntary statement; incriminating statement.

Select Usage (details) :



Minnick v. Mississippi cartoons image illustration picture
Minnick v. Mississippi

Description:
When counsel is requested, interrogation must cease, and officials may not reinitiate interrogation without counsel present, whether or not accused has consulted with his attorney.

Select Usage (details) :



New York v. Quarles cartoons image illustration picture
New York v. Quarles

Description:
Miranda warnings are not required before police question a suspect in custody about imminent matters related to public safety. Exigeny.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Patane cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Patane

Description:
Nontestimonial evidence obtained as a result of a defendant s voluntary statement given without the benefit of miranda warnings need not be excluded at the defendant's trial; fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine.

Select Usage (details) :



Missouri v. Seibert cartoons image illustration picture
Missouri v. Seibert

Description:
Incriminating statements initially made before miranda warnings are given are not admissible simply because they are repeated after proper warnings are given.

Select Usage (details) :



Moran v. Burbine cartoons image illustration picture
Moran v. Burbine

Description:
Absent coercion, a defendant's waiver made with a full understanding of his rights is valid as a matter of law.

Select Usage (details) :



Dickerson v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Dickerson v. United States

Description:
Congress may not legislatively supersede court decisions interpreting and applying the constitution. Prophylactic stare decisis.

Select Usage (details) :



Chavez v. Martinez cartoons image illustration picture
Chavez v. Martinez

Description:
The fifth amendment right against self incrimination does not attach until criminal proceedings have been initiated.

Select Usage (details) :



Brewer v. Williams I cartoons image illustration picture
Brewer v. Williams I

Description:
The right to the assistance of counsel can be waived only by the knowing relinquishment of that right. Express waiver; habeas corpus; implied waiver.

Select Usage (details) :



Kuhlman v. Wilson cartoons image illustration picture
Kuhlman v. Wilson

Description:
When police take no direct action to solicit incriminating statements, but merely listen to voluntary statements made by an accused, the right to counsel is not violated. Informant.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Wade cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Wade

Description:
An in court identification of a defendant by a witness must be excluded from evidence if it is based solely on a pretrial identification that was obtained without notice to and participation by defense counsel. Exclusionary rule lineup.

Select Usage (details) :



Kirby v. Illinois cartoons image illustration picture
Kirby v. Illinois

Description:
The right to counsel does not attach until the initiation of formal judicial proceedings. Showup.

Select Usage (details) :



Manson v. Brathwaite cartoons image illustration picture
Manson v. Brathwaite

Description:
An unnecessarily suggestive pretrial identification of the defendant need not be excluded if, under the totality of the circumstances, it is sufficiently reliable.

Select Usage (details) :



Boyd v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Boyd v. United States

Description:
The compulsory production of private books and papers subject to forfeiture compels owner to be witness against himself and is equivalent to an unreasonable search and seizure. Fourth amendment; right against self incriimination.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Dionisio cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Dionisio

Description:
Fourth amendment protects individuals from unreasonable search and seizure of all evidence in which they have reasonable expectation of privacy. civil contempt; investigative grand jury.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Mandujano cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Mandujano

Description:
Miranda warnings do not apply to grand jury investigations. perjury; right against self incrimination.

Select Usage (details) :



Kastigar v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Kastigar v. United States

Description:
The government may compel witness testimony under statutory immunity against the use of his testimony and all derivative evidence against him in a criminal case. Immunity transactional; immunity use.

Select Usage (details) :



Fisher v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Fisher v. United States

Description:
The fifth amendment does not prevent compelled disclosure of client materials disclosed to an attorney where the materials would not be privileged in the hands of the client. Attorney client privilege.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Hubbell cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Hubbell

Description:
The privilege against self incrimination protects against being compelled to provide information to a grand jury about the existence of sources of potentially incriminating evidence. Independent counsel; subpoena duces tecum; ad testificandum.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Salerno cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Salerno

Description:
Preventative detention of criminal defendant does not violate substantive due process under fifth amendment nor constitute excessive bail under eighth amendment if clear and convincing evidence defendant presents threat to safety of community.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Armstrong cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Armstrong

Description:
To go forward on a claim of selective prosecution based on race, the claimant must produce evidence that similarly situated offenders of a different race could have been prosecuted but were not. Discovery.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Batchelder cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Batchelder

Description:
Identical substantive criminal statutes do not offend due process by establishing different sentencing provisions available upon conviction. Sentence.

Select Usage (details) :



Untied States v. Goodwin cartoons image illustration picture
Untied States v. Goodwin

Description:
Due process does not prohibit a prosecutor from adding more severe or additional charges against a defendant after the defendant requests a trial by jury.

Select Usage (details) :



Coleman v. Alabama cartoons image illustration picture
Coleman v. Alabama

Description:
Because preliminary hearings are a critical stage of prosecution, defendants are entitled to the assistance of counsel. bind over grand jury; harmless error; preliminary hearing; right to counsel.

Select Usage (details) :



Vasquez v. Hillery cartoons image illustration picture
Vasquez v. Hillery

Description:
Racial discrimination in the selection of the grand jury requires dismissal of the defendant's conviction. Discrimination; equal protection; habeas corpus; harmless error; stare decisis.

Select Usage (details) :



Costello v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Costello v. United States

Description:
Grand jury indictments may be issued based solely on hearsay evidence. Hearsay indictment.

Select Usage (details) :



Barker v. Wingo cartoons image illustration picture
Barker v. Wingo

Description:
For speedy trial claims, courts must apply balancing test of conduct of both prosecution and defendant, including length of delay, reason for delay, defendant's assertion of his right, and prejudice to defendant. Habeas corpus; sixth amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



Doggett v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Doggett v. United States

Description:
Lengthy delays between indictment and trial caused by the government negligence violates the sixth amendment right to a speedy trial. prejudice presumption; statute of repose.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Lovasco cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Lovasco

Description:
To prosecute a defendant following investigative delay does not deprive him of due process, even if his defense might have been somewhat prejudiced by the lapse of time. Due process; indictment.

Select Usage (details) :



Williams v. Flordia cartoons image illustration picture
Williams v. Flordia

Description:
The fifth amendment privilege against self incrimination is not violated by a requirement that a defendant provide notice of an alibi defense and disclose his alibi witnesses to the prosecution prior to trial. Protective order.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Bagley cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Bagley

Description:
Government failure to assist defense by disclosing impeachment evidence of witnesses is constitutional violation if it deprived defendant of fair trial; material if suppression undermines confidence in outcome. Exculpatory evidence; harmless error.

Select Usage (details) :



Pennsylvania v. Ritchie cartoons image illustration picture
Pennsylvania v. Ritchie

Description:
The nondisclosure of even privileged records violates due process and threatens fundamental fairness in the trial process. compulsary process clause; confrontation clause; due process in camera.

Select Usage (details) :



Bordenkircher v. Hayes cartoons image illustration picture
Bordenkircher v. Hayes

Description:
It is not vindictive exercise of prosecutor's discretion, and therefore not violation of due process, to carry out threat to reindict defendant on more serious charges if defendant does not plead guilty to original offense charged. Recidivist.

Select Usage (details) :



Santobello v. New York cartoons image illustration picture
Santobello v. New York

Description:
When a plea of guilty has been entered in consideration of a promise made by a prosecutor, the prosecutor must fulfill that promise. Plea bargain.

Select Usage (details) :



Mabry v. Johnson cartoons image illustration picture
Mabry v. Johnson

Description:
A voluntary and intelligent plea of guilty made by an accused person, who has been advised by competent counsel, may not be collaterally attacked. Concurrent sentence; consecutive sentence; specific performance.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Benchimol cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Benchimol

Description:
Each party must comply with the precise terms of a plea agreement.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Ruiz cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Ruiz

Description:
The constitution does not require disclosure of impeaching information about witness testimony before entry of a guilty plea. Downward departure; sentencing guidelines.

Select Usage (details) :



Boykin v. Alabama cartoons image illustration picture
Boykin v. Alabama

Description:
A waiver of constitutional rights through a guilty plea must be voluntarily and willingly made. Plea waiver.

Select Usage (details) :



Henderson v.Morgan cartoons image illustration picture
Henderson v.Morgan

Description:
A guilty plea is not knowingly and intelligently made, and therefore not voluntarily made, if the defendant did not receive adequate notice of the offense to which he pleaded guilty. Collateral attack.

Select Usage (details) :



North Carolina v. Alford cartoons image illustration picture
North Carolina v. Alford

Description:
a court may not enter a judgment upon a plea of guilty unless it is satisfied that there is a factual basis for the plea.alford plea; nolo contendere.

Select Usage (details) :



Blanton v. City of North Las Vegas cartoons image illustration picture
Blanton v. City of North Las Vegas

Description:
The right to trial by jury attaches when a crime carries a maximum jail term of six months or more or the legislature otherwise classifies the offense as serious. Petty offense; probation.

Select Usage (details) :



Burch v. Louisiana cartoons image illustration picture
Burch v. Louisiana

Description:
When a jury consists of six members, its verdict must be unanimous.

Select Usage (details) :



Carter v. Jury Commission cartoons image illustration picture
Carter v. Jury Commission

Description:
The constitution does not forbid states to prescribe relevant qualifications for their jurors. Fair cross section requirement; jury.

Select Usage (details) :



Taylor v. Louisiana cartoons image illustration picture
Taylor v. Louisiana

Description:
A petit jury must represent a fair cross section of the community to ensure a defendant's right to trial by an impartial jury under the sixth amendment. Jury wheel; petit jury venire.

Select Usage (details) :



Turner v. Murray cartoons image illustration picture
Turner v. Murray

Description:
A capital defendant accused of an interracial crime is entitled to have prospective jurors informed of the race of the victim and questioned on the issue of racial bias. capital offense; death penalty; death sentence; voir dire.

Select Usage (details) :



Lockhart v. McCree cartoons image illustration picture
Lockhart v. McCree

Description:
The constitution does not prohibit the removal for cause in a capital case of prospective jurors opposed to the death penalty and unable to impose it if necessary. Bifurcated trial.

Select Usage (details) :



J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. cartoons image illustration picture
J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B.

Description:
Peremptory challenges on the basis of gender violate the equal protection clause.

Select Usage (details) :



Murphy v. Florida cartoons image illustration picture
Murphy v. Florida

Description:
In order for media coverage to infect a trial with unfairness, a juror's preconceived notions of guilt or innocence must prevent him or her from rendering a verdict based on the evidence presented in court. impartial jury.

Select Usage (details) :



Gentile v. State Bar of Nevada cartoons image illustration picture
Gentile v. State Bar of Nevada

Description:
Pure political speech is protected under the first amendment absent a legitimate government interest in its suppression. First amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



Chandler v. Florida cartoons image illustration picture
Chandler v. Florida

Description:
Publicized trials are not per se a due process violation. due process; prejudice; sequestration.

Select Usage (details) :



Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court Press Enterprise II cartoons image illustration picture
Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court Press Enterprise II

Description:
The qualified first amendment right of access to criminal proceedings applies to preliminary hearings that function similarly to criminal trials.

Select Usage (details) :



Rompilla v. Beard cartoons image illustration picture
Rompilla v. Beard

Description:
Even when capital defendant family members and defendant himself say no mitigating evidence, lawyer must make reasonable efforts to obtain and review prosecution evidence of aggravation at sentencing phase of trial. Prejudice.

Select Usage (details) :



Florida v. Nixon cartoons image illustration picture
Florida v. Nixon

Description:
Counsel's failure to obtain the defendant's express consent to a strategy of conceding guilt in a capital trial does not render counsel's assistance ineffective when it is reasonable under the circumstances.

Select Usage (details) :



Wheat v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Wheat v. United States

Description:
The sixth amendment does not afford a defendant the right to chosen counsel when a conflict of interest may arise.

Select Usage (details) :



Mickens v. Taylor cartoons image illustration picture
Mickens v. Taylor

Description:
When counsel represents successive defendants with a potential conflict of interest, a defendant must demonstrate that a conflict existed that affected the outcome of his case. Habeas corpus.

Select Usage (details) :



Illinois v. Allen cartoons image illustration picture
Illinois v. Allen

Description:
Confrontation clause. a defendant can lose his right to be present at trial if, after warning by the judge, he conducts himself in a manner so disorderly, disruptive, and disrespectful of the court that trial cannot be carried on with him in courtroom.

Select Usage (details) :



Crawford v. Washington cartoons image illustration picture
Crawford v. Washington

Description:
Sixth amendment confrontation clause demands, for an out of court statement to be admitted into evidence, the witness must be unavailable and defendant must have prior opportunity to cross examine the declarant. Cross examination; hearsay.

Select Usage (details) :



Richardson v. Marsh cartoons image illustration picture
Richardson v. Marsh

Description:
The confrontation clause is not violated by the admission of a nontestifying codefendant confession, with proper limiting instruction, when the confession is redacted to eliminate defendant name and any reference to her existence. Redaction.

Select Usage (details) :



Davis v. Alaska cartoons image illustration picture
Davis v. Alaska

Description:
The confrontation clause requires that a defendant be afforded a meaningful opportunity to cross examine a witness against him concerning potential bias or motive. Juvenile delinquent.

Select Usage (details) :



Griffin v. California cartoons image illustration picture
Griffin v. California

Description:
Under the fifth amendment, a prosecutor may not comment on a defendant s decision not to testify at his trial and the court may not instruct the jury that the defendant's silence is evidence of his guilt. Bifurcated trial; self incrimination clause.

Select Usage (details) :



Rock v. Arkansas cartoons image illustration picture
Rock v. Arkansas

Description:
The per se exclusion of all hypnotically refreshed testimony without regard to its reliability in a particular case is arbitrary and does not further a legitimate state interest.

Select Usage (details) :



Taylor v. Kentucky cartoons image illustration picture
Taylor v. Kentucky

Description:
Jury instructions; extrajudicial factors; proper instruction; presumption of innocence; lack of evidentiary value of an indictment; reasonable doubt; voir dire.

Select Usage (details) :



Darden v. Wainwright cartoons image illustration picture
Darden v. Wainwright

Description:
Improper prosecutorial comments do not require reversal of a conviction unless they so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process. Closing argument.

Select Usage (details) :



Herrera v. Collins cartoons image illustration picture
Herrera v. Collins

Description:
Defendant's actual innocence based on newly discovered evidence is insufficient basis for challenging conviction on habeas review unless independent constitutional violation exists. Clemency.

Select Usage (details) :



Ashe v. Swenson cartoons image illustration picture
Ashe v. Swenson

Description:
The fifth amendment protection against double jeopardy bars trial of an acquitted defendant on another charge unless the prior acquittal was based on evidence other than that involved in the second prosecution. Double jeopardy clause.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Dixon cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Dixon

Description:
Person who has been held in criminal contempt for committing criminal offense may not be criminally prosecuted for committing underlying offense if prosecution for the criminal offense does not require proof of different facts. Criminal contempt.

Select Usage (details) :



Heath v. Alabama cartoons image illustration picture
Heath v. Alabama

Description:
Under the dual sovereignty doctrine, the double jeopardy clause does not bar successive prosecutions for the same conduct by two states. autrefois; convict; dual sovereignty doctrine.

Select Usage (details) :



Hudson v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Hudson v. United States

Description:
A penalty will implicate the double jeopardy clause only if there was a legislative intent that the penalty be criminal in nature and if the statutory scheme is so punitive as to make the remedy criminal. Civil penalty.

Select Usage (details) :



Arizona v. Washington cartoons image illustration picture
Arizona v. Washington

Description:
Granting a mistrial over a defendant's objection when the prosecutor proves that there was a manifest necessity for the mistrial does not violate the double jeopardy clause.

Select Usage (details) :



Oregon v. Kennedy cartoons image illustration picture
Oregon v. Kennedy

Description:
If a defendant's request for a mistrial is granted, retrial is barred only if the mistrial was due to prosecutorial conduct that was intended to provoke a mistrial.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Scott cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Scott

Description:
Retrial after the dismissal of a prosecution is barred only when the case was dismissed because the evidence was legally insufficient to support a conviction.

Select Usage (details) :



Burks v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Burks v. United States

Description:
The double jeopardy clause bars retrial of a defendant whose conviction was reversed on appeal based on insufficient evidence to sustain a conviction. Insanity defense.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Grayson cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Grayson

Description:
A judge may consider a defendant's false trial testimony when setting a sentence, as long as the sentence falls within the statutory limits. Sentencing guidelines.

Select Usage (details) :



Mitchell v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Mitchell v. United States

Description:
A plea of guilty is not a waiver of the privilege against self incrimination at sentencing, and a sentencing judge may not draw an adverse inference from a defendant silence. Colloquy.

Select Usage (details) :



Blakely v. Washington cartoons image illustration picture
Blakely v. Washington

Description:
A judge may not increase a sentence beyond the maximum allowed for an offense based on facts not proven at trial or admitted as a part of the guilty plea. Determinate sentence; indeterminate sentencing.

Select Usage (details) :



McCleskey v. Kemp cartoons image illustration picture
McCleskey v. Kemp

Description:
In order to challenge a death sentence on the basis of racial discrimination, a defendant must show either a discriminatory purpose in his case or a discriminatory purpose in enacting or maintaining the death penalty. Venire.

Select Usage (details) :



Roper v. Simmons cartoons image illustration picture
Roper v. Simmons

Description:
The eighth amendment prohibits imposing the death penalty for crimes committed by a minor.

Select Usage (details) :



Stack v. Boyle cartoons image illustration picture
Stack v. Boyle

Description:
Under the eighth amendment, bail must be reasonably fixed to ensure a defendant will appear at trial based on the specific facts of the crime charged and not the character of the crime. Excessive bail.

Select Usage (details) :



Powell v. Alabama cartoons image illustration picture
Powell v. Alabama

Description:
A criminal defendant in state court must be given ample opportunity to retain counsel before trial, and, if none is retained, an attorney must be appointed to represent him or her. Right to counsel.

Select Usage (details) :



Brown v. Mississippi cartoons image illustration picture
Brown v. Mississippi

Description:
Confessions supporting a conviction must be obtained through interrogation not violating the defendant due process rights under the fourteenth amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



Smith v. Maryland cartoons image illustration picture
Smith v. Maryland

Description:
An individual assumes the risk of disclosure of information knowingly conveyed to a third party. Pen register.

Select Usage (details) :



Lo-Ji Sales, Inc.  v.  New York cartoons image illustration picture
Lo-Ji Sales, Inc. v. New York

Description:
A warrant must particularly describe the things to be seized, and items not specifically listed on the search warrant may not be seized. Obscene.

Select Usage (details) :



Welsh v.  Wisconsin cartoons image illustration picture
Welsh v. Wisconsin

Description:
Privacy in the home should not be violated via warrantless searches relative to minor offenses, even if evidence may be lost or destroyed.

Select Usage (details) :



New York v.  Belton cartoons image illustration picture
New York v. Belton

Description:
When a suspect is arrested in his vehicle, the interior of the car and any containers in it can be searched pursuant to the lawful arrest.

Select Usage (details) :



Chambers v.  Maroney cartoons image illustration picture
Chambers v. Maroney

Description:
If have probable cause to believe automobile contains articles that they may be entitled to seize, may search the vehicle pursuant to lawful arrest, without warrant, or impound vehicle into police custody to search at later time. Fruits of the crime.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Chadwick cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Chadwick

Description:
A search warrant is required to search personal property of an arrestee at the point where the property to be searched comes under the exclusive dominion of police authority. Inherently dangerous.

Select Usage (details) :



California v.  Acevedo cartoons image illustration picture
California v. Acevedo

Description:
Police can search an automobile and all containers in it when they have probable cause to believe contraband is contained somewhere within the automobile. Stare decisis

Select Usage (details) :



Arizona v. Hicks cartoons image illustration picture
Arizona v. Hicks

Description:
The plain view doctrine may not be used to justify warrantless searches or seizures of a dwelling, which require probable cause.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Matlock cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Matlock

Description:
Voluntary consent of any joint occupant of a residence to search the premises jointly occupied is valid against the co-occupant, permitting evidence discovered in the search to be used against the latter at a criminal trial.

Select Usage (details) :



Dunaway v. New York cartoons image illustration picture
Dunaway v. New York

Description:
Police may not subject a suspect to custodial interrogation unless they have probable cause to believe a crime has been committed.

Select Usage (details) :



California v. Hodari D. cartoons image illustration picture
California v. Hodari D.

Description:
An arrest requires either physical force or submission to the assertion of authority. Yield submission.

Select Usage (details) :



Alabama v. White cartoons image illustration picture
Alabama v. White

Description:
An anonymous tip received by police and not completely corroborated can be used as the basis for a terry stop as long as a significant portion of the tip is verified.

Select Usage (details) :



Michigan v. Long cartoons image illustration picture
Michigan v. Long

Description:
Search of passenger compartment of automobile is permissible if officer has reasonable belief, based on specific and articulable facts and rational inferences from facts, that suspect is dangerous and may gain immediate control of weapons.

Select Usage (details) :



Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz cartoons image illustration picture
Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz

Description:
Police may set up temporary sobriety checkpoints and stop each car coming through to look for signs of intoxication.

Select Usage (details) :



Rakas v. Illinois cartoons image illustration picture
Rakas v. Illinois

Description:
To sustain a fourth amendment challenge, a defendant must establish a legitimate expectation of privacy in the areas searched or in the items seized. Seizure standing.

Select Usage (details) :



Minnesota v. Carter cartoons image illustration picture
Minnesota v. Carter

Description:
Residential visitors, who are on the premises for only a short time and who claim no connection to the host other than to transact business, have no legitimate expectation of privacy in the premises under the fourth amendment. Curtilage.

Select Usage (details) :



Silverthorne Lumber Company v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Silverthorne Lumber Company v. United States

Description:
Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine; independent source rule; the fourth amendment prohibits use of evidence obtained by an illegal search and seizure, and evidence obtained as a result of that constitutional violation unless independent source.

Select Usage (details) :



Murray v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Murray v. United States

Description:
Independent source doctrine applies to both evidence obtained for the first time during independent lawful search, and also to evidence initially discovered during, or as consequence of unlawful search, but later discovered independently.

Select Usage (details) :



Lisenba v. California cartoons image illustration picture
Lisenba v. California

Description:
A voluntary confession does not violate due process when used to convict a defendant of a capital crime.

Select Usage (details) :



Colorado v. Connelly cartoons image illustration picture
Colorado v. Connelly

Description:
A confession obtained from a person suffering from undetected mental illness is not a deprivation of due process in the absence of police misconduct.

Select Usage (details) :



Bram v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Bram v. United States

Description:
An involuntary confession is not admissible as evidence against the accused by virtue of the fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Right against self incrimination.

Select Usage (details) :



Edwards v. Arizona cartoons image illustration picture
Edwards v. Arizona

Description:
Right against self incrimination; right to counsel. accused who expresses a desire to deal only through counsel does not waive that right merely by responding to further police-initiated questioning unless accused initiates further communication.

Select Usage (details) :



Michigan v. Jackson cartoons image illustration picture
Michigan v. Jackson

Description:
An accused who requests the appointment of counsel at arraignment is permitted under the sixth amendment to consult with that counsel during any custodial interrogation by the police, absent waiver by the accused.

Select Usage (details) :



McNeil v. Wisconsin cartoons image illustration picture
McNeil v. Wisconsin

Description:
The sixth amendment right to counsel is offense-specific, and invocation of such right does not also invoke the right to counsel under the fifth amendment, which is not offense-specific.

Select Usage (details) :



Sherman v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Sherman v. United States

Description:
An entrapment defense must be sustained when the criminal conduct arises from the inducement of law enforcement officers, not the intention of the defendant.

Select Usage (details) :



Stovall v. Denno cartoons image illustration picture
Stovall v. Denno

Description:
A showup, rather than a traditional lineup, used for identification of an accused violates the accused due process rights when it is unnecessarily suggestive under the totality of the circumstances.

Select Usage (details) :



Blackledge v. Perry cartoons image illustration picture
Blackledge v. Perry

Description:
Criminal defendant due process rights are violated if the prosecutor charges defendant with a more serious crime after defendant exercises statutory right to challenge conviction for less serious offense arising from the same conduct.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Williams cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Williams

Description:
Exculpatory evidence. a criminal defendant in federal court is not entitled to a dismissal of the indictment because the prosecutor failed to present to the grand jury substantial exculpatory evidence.

Select Usage (details) :



Ohio v. Reiner cartoons image illustration picture
Ohio v. Reiner

Description:
Despite a claim of innocence, the fifth amendment protection against self-incrimination is available to all those who have reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer. Transactional immunity.

Select Usage (details) :



Arizona v. Youngblood cartoons image illustration picture
Arizona v. Youngblood

Description:
The failure of the police to preserve potentially useful evidence is not a denial of due process of law unless the defendant can show bad faith on the part of the police. Exculpatory evidence.

Select Usage (details) :



State v. Reldan cartoons image illustration picture
State v. Reldan

Description:
Joinder of offenses; severance. no need for severance exists until a defendant makes a convincing showing that he has both important testimony to give concerning one count and a strong need to refrain from testifying on the other.

Select Usage (details) :



Nix v. Whiteside cartoons image illustration picture
Nix v. Whiteside

Description:
Perjury; criminal defendant is not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel when his lawyer admonishes him not to give perjured testimony and threatens to disclose to the court any false testimony the defendant may give.

Select Usage (details) :



Scott v. Illinois cartoons image illustration picture
Scott v. Illinois

Description:
Under the sixth amendment, no indigent defendant may be sentenced to imprisonment unless the state has provided him with appointed counsel.

Select Usage (details) :



Godinez v. Moran cartoons image illustration picture
Godinez v. Moran

Description:
The standard for determining whether a defendant is competent to waive the right to counsel and to enter a guilty plea is the same as the standard for determining whether the defendant is competent to stand trial.

Select Usage (details) :



Brady v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Brady v. United States

Description:
A guilty plea is not involuntary merely because it was entered into to avoid the possibility of the death penalty. voluntary; knowingly; coerced.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Brechner cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Brechner

Description:
A prosecutor is not bound by promises made pursuant to a cooperation agreement if the defendant does not fulfill his agreed promises. Misrepresentation.

Select Usage (details) :



McMann v. Richardson cartoons image illustration picture
McMann v. Richardson

Description:
If defendant plea of guilty is based on reasonably competent advice, it is intelligent plea not open to attack on the ground defendant counsel may have misjudged admissibility of defendant confession. habeas corpus.

Select Usage (details) :



Ham v. South Carolina cartoons image illustration picture
Ham v. South Carolina

Description:
The fourteenth amendment requires a state trial judge to explore racial prejudices of prospective jurors to ensure a fair, impartial jury. Voir dire.

Select Usage (details) :



People v. Newton cartoons image illustration picture
People v. Newton

Description:
When a prospective juror harbors preconceived notions of defendant guilt that cannot be set aside by consideration of the evidence, the juror must be dismissed for cause to ensure an impartial jury. Voir dire.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Thomas cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Thomas

Description:
When the evidence discloses any possibility that a juror views arise from the sufficiency of government evidence, disqualification must be denied. peremptory challenge; batson challenge; strike in camera.

Select Usage (details) :



Olden v. Kentucky cartoons image illustration picture
Olden v. Kentucky

Description:
Under the sixth amendment, a defendant is entitled to confront witnesses against him, which includes the right of cross-examination. Confrontation clause.

Select Usage (details) :



Idaho v. Wright cartoons image illustration picture
Idaho v. Wright

Description:
The admission at trial of hearsay statements does not violate confrontation clause as long as declarant is unavailable and statements are sufficiently reliable, based either on firmly rooted hearsay exception or other showings of trustworthiness.

Select Usage (details) :



Cruz v. New York cartoons image illustration picture
Cruz v. New York

Description:
When a non-testifying codefendant confession incriminating defendant is not directly admissible against defendant, the confrontation clause bars its admission at their joint trial, even if the jury is instructed not to consider it against the defendant.

Select Usage (details) :



Gray v. Maryland cartoons image illustration picture
Gray v. Maryland

Description:
The use of blanks or deleted references in a redacted confession of a co-defendant may not be offered against a defendant at a joint trial, even with a limiting instruction. Redaction.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Burr cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Burr

Description:
The sixth amendment right to compel witnesses includes the right to compel production of documents within the witness' possession. Subpoena duces tecum.

Select Usage (details) :



Taylor v. Illinois cartoons image illustration picture
Taylor v. Illinois

Description:
The per se exclusion of evidence knowingly disclosed in violation of discovery rules does not violate the compulsory process clause. subpoena; offer of proof.

Select Usage (details) :



Williams v. New York cartoons image illustration picture
Williams v. New York

Description:
Imposition of death sentence for murder in the first degree is not void under due process clause solely because trial court considered additional information from probation department and other sources. Pre sentence investigaton.

Select Usage (details) :



McMillan v. Pennsylvania cartoons image illustration picture
McMillan v. Pennsylvania

Description:
Right to a jury trial is not violated by pennsylvania mandatory minimum sentencing act. may impose minimum upon finding, by a preponderance of the evidence, of certain facts. Defendant possessed a firearm during enumerated offense.

Select Usage (details) :



North Carolina v. Pearce cartoons image illustration picture
North Carolina v. Pearce

Description:
In imposing new sentence upon defendant whose original sentence has been set aside, trial judge may consider events subsequent to first trial and may impose sentence that is greater or less than original sentence.

Select Usage (details) :



Texas v. McCullough cartoons image illustration picture
Texas v. McCullough

Description:
The due process clause of the fourteenth amendment bars increased sentences on retrial that are motivated by vindictiveness on the part of the sentencing judge. Presumption.

Select Usage (details) :



Mistretta v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Mistretta v. United States

Description:
Sentencing guidelines are constitutional, amounting to neither an excessive delegation of legislative power nor a violation of the separation of powers principle. Indeterminate sentence.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Harrington cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Harrington

Description:
Sentencing guidelines often produce harsh results that are patently unfair because they fail to take into account individual circumstances.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Dunnigan cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Dunnigan

Description:
Sentence enhancement for the defendant perjury at trial is not unconstitutional to the extent it does not undermine a defendant right to testify on his or her own behalf. Sentencing guidelines.

Select Usage (details) :



Koon v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Koon v. United States

Description:
An appellate court should not review a district court sentencing departure decision de novo but instead should ask whether the sentencing court abused its discretion. Downward departure from sentencing guidelines.

Select Usage (details) :



Fong Foo v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Fong Foo v. United States

Description:
A judgment of acquittal, even if based on error, is a final judgment that cannot be appealed. Writ of mandamus; double jeopardy.

Select Usage (details) :



Downum v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Downum v. United States

Description:
If an impaneled jury is discharged because the prosecution witness is unavailable, double jeopardy applies to bar the impaneling of a second jury and a new trial. Impanel.

Select Usage (details) :



Illinois v. Somerville cartoons image illustration picture
Illinois v. Somerville

Description:
The manifest necessity requirement, which authorizes granting a mistrial in a criminal case and precludes the defendant from successfully raising a plea of double jeopardy, is met when the indictment is insufficient to charge a crime. Impanel.

Select Usage (details) :



Blockburger v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Blockburger v. United States

Description:
Continuing offense; separate and distinct offenses, even if of the same nature, do not constitute a continuing offense, such as two sales of narcotics to the same purchaser, but at different times. The narcotics act penalizes each individual sale.

Select Usage (details) :



Brown v. Ohio cartoons image illustration picture
Brown v. Ohio

Description:
Double jeopardy. a conviction of a lesser-included offense precludes a subsequent prosecution for the greater offense even though the two actions occurred several days apart.

Select Usage (details) :



Harris v. Oklahoma cartoons image illustration picture
Harris v. Oklahoma

Description:
When the conviction of a greater crime cannot be had without conviction of a lesser crime, the double jeopardy clause bars prosecution for the lesser crime after conviction for the greater crime.

Select Usage (details) :



Bartkus v. Illinois cartoons image illustration picture
Bartkus v. Illinois

Description:
Autrefois. successive federal and state prosecutions do not violate the fifth amendment s double jeopardy clause. Sovereignty.

Select Usage (details) :



Jackson v. Virginia cartoons image illustration picture
Jackson v. Virginia

Description:
A review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction requires a determination as to whether the record evidence could reasonably support a finding of guilt beyond a "reasonable doubt" standard.

Select Usage (details) :



Teague v. Lane cartoons image illustration picture
Teague v. Lane

Description:
Procedural rules usually do not apply retroactively. new constitutional rules of criminal procedure will not be applicable to those cases that have become final before the new rules are announced. Ratio decidendi.

Select Usage (details) :



Wainwright v. Sykes cartoons image illustration picture
Wainwright v. Sykes

Description:
Contemporaneous objection rule. absent a showing of cause and prejudice attendant to a state procedural waiver, a federal habeas corpus review of a waived objection to the admission of a confession at trial is barred. Coram nobis.

Select Usage (details) :



Smith v. Murray cartoons image illustration picture
Smith v. Murray

Description:
A habeas corpus petition should be dismissed if, in the absence of any cause or prejudice, the underlying constitutional claim was not first raised in a state proceeding on direct appeal.

Select Usage (details) :



City of Indianapolis v. Edmond cartoons image illustration picture
City of Indianapolis v. Edmond

Description:
Highway checkpoints are unconstitutional when used for ordinary law enforcement purposes to advance a general interest in ordinary crime control.

Select Usage (details) :



Hector (A Slave) v. State cartoons image illustration picture
Hector (A Slave) v. State

Description:
Coerced confession offered under the influence of pain are inadmissible; torture; interrogation; court must decide whether a confession was voluntary.

Select Usage (details) :



Chavez v. Martinez cartoons image illustration picture
Chavez v. Martinez

Description:
Qualified immunity does not apply to deprivation of constitutional rights; coercive police interrogation resulting in statements not used at trial violates Constitution only if interrogator's conduct shocks the conscience.

Select Usage (details) :



Chavez v. Martinez cartoons image illustration picture
Chavez v. Martinez

Description:
Self-incrimination impossible when there is no trial; violation of right against self-incrimination occurs only when one is compelled to be a witness against himself in a criminal case.

Select Usage (details) :



Oregon v. Elstad cartoons image illustration picture
Oregon v. Elstad

Description:
Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine aplies to Fourth amendment, not Fifth Amendment; although Miranda requires the suppression of an un-warned admission, the admissibility of any subsequent statement turns on whether it was made voluntarily.

Select Usage (details) :



Hoffman v. United States cartoons image illustration picture
Hoffman v. United States

Description:
Fifth Amendment applies to grand jury testimony; privilege against self-incrimination may be invoked if there is a possibility that the answers sought would have a tendency to incriminate the witness.

Select Usage (details) :



Ineffective Assistance of Counsel in Death Penalty Case cartoons image illustration picture
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel in Death Penalty Case

Description:
Rompilla v. Beard; capital defendant and family say no mitigating evidence, but defense lawyer must make reasonable efforts to obtain and review prosecution evidence of aggravation at sentencing phase of trial; death penalty.

Select Usage (details) :



Sixth Amendment Right to Representation of Counsel cartoons image illustration picture
Sixth Amendment Right to Representation of Counsel

Description:
United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez; wrongful denial of the right to counsel of the defendant's choosing is a structural error (fundamental error) not subject to harmless-error review; pro hac vice.

Select Usage (details) :



Suspicionless Searches of Parolees cartoons image illustration picture
Suspicionless Searches of Parolees

Description:
Samson v. California; evidence seized in a suspicionless search of a parolee is admissible under the Fourth Amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



Voluntary Statements to Government Informant Admissable cartoons image illustration picture
Voluntary Statements to Government Informant Admissable

Description:
Hoffa v. United States; Fourth Amendment protections from unreasonable searches and seizures extend to hotel rooms, but statements voluntarily made to informant are not inadmissible.

Select Usage (details) :



Entrapment Defense cartoons image illustration picture
Entrapment Defense

Description:
Sherman v. United States; repeated requests to commit a crime and pleas for sympathy establish entrapment; if defendant's criminal conduct arises from the inducement of law enforcement officers, not the intention of the defendant.

Select Usage (details) :



Police Searches Of Network Computers Require Warrant cartoons image illustration picture
Police Searches Of Network Computers Require Warrant

Description:
United States v. Heckenkamp; absent clear warnings, connecting a personal computer to a computer network does not relinquish an otherwise objectively reasonable expectation of privacy; warrantless search.

Select Usage (details) :



Warrantless Search of Sealed, Opaque Container Unreasonable cartoons image illustration picture
Warrantless Search of Sealed, Opaque Container Unreasonable

Description:
United States v. Villarreal; individuals have a reasonable expectation that their letters and other sealed containers will not be opened by government agents without a warrant when they are surrendered to a carrier.

Select Usage (details) :



Pen Register cartoons image illustration picture
Pen Register

Description:
Smith v. Maryland; recovering telephone numbers with pen register not a search; individuals assume the risk of disclosure of information they knowingly convey to a third party.

Select Usage (details) :



Federal Wiretapping Laws cartoons image illustration picture
Federal Wiretapping Laws

Description:
United States v. Turk; replaying of legally recorded conversations does not constitute an illegal aural interception; aural acquisition.

Select Usage (details) :



Employer Listening to Private Employee Telephone Conversations cartoons image illustration picture
Employer Listening to Private Employee Telephone Conversations

Description:
Deal v. Spears; Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1996 creates exception to civil liability for aural interception during business use of a telephone extension; scope of exception limited to the business purpose.

Select Usage (details) :



United States v. Resendiz-Ponce cartoons image illustration picture
United States v. Resendiz-Ponce

Description:
United States v. Resendiz-Ponce; indictments need not ordinarily plead specific conduct by the defendant to be constitutional.

Select Usage (details) :



Shackled Defendant Before Jury cartoons image illustration picture
Shackled Defendant Before Jury

Description:
Deck v. Missouri; the constitution prohibits the use of visible shackles during the penalty phase of a criminal trial unless the use is justified by an essential state interest specific to the defendant on trial.

Select Usage (details) :



Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause and Taped Testimony cartoons image illustration picture
Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause and Taped Testimony

Description:
Crawford v. Washington; out-of-court statements are inadmissible into evidence if defendant has no opportunity to cross-examine speaker, unless witness is unavailable and defendant has prior opportunity to cross-examine the declarant; hearsay.

Select Usage (details) :



Search of Vehicle Incident to Arrest cartoons image illustration picture
Search of Vehicle Incident to Arrest

Description:
Arizona v. Gant; Police may search vehicle incident to recent occupant's arrest only if arrestee is within reaching distance of passenger compartment at time search or reasonable to believe vehicle contains evidence offense of arrest; stare decisis.

Select Usage (details) :



School Search of Student Property cartoons image illustration picture
School Search of Student Property

Description:
Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding; school search permissible if scope of measures adopted is reasonably related to objectives of search and not excessively intrusive; in loco parentis; qualified immunity.

Select Usage (details) :



Search of Incident to Mistaken Arrest cartoons image illustration picture
Search of Incident to Mistaken Arrest

Description:
Herring v. United States; The exclusionary rule is not an individual right and applies only where it results in appreciable police deterrence; respondeat superior.

Select Usage (details) :



Defendant Consent to Unrepresented Interrogation cartoons image illustration picture
Defendant Consent to Unrepresented Interrogation

Description:
Montejo v. Louisiana; A criminal defendant's consent to police-initiated interrogation cannot be presumed involuntary simply because the court previously appointed a lawyer to represent him; preliminary hearing.

Select Usage (details) :



Sentencing Judges May Consider Various Factors cartoons image illustration picture
Sentencing Judges May Consider Various Factors

Description:
Kimbrough v. United States; Under Booker, the cocaine Guidelines, like all other Sentencing Guidelines, are advisory only.

Select Usage (details) :



Appellate Court Review of Sentencing cartoons image illustration picture
Appellate Court Review of Sentencing

Description:
Rita v. United States; An appellate court may apply a non-binding presumption that a sentencing court's imposition of a within-Guidelines sentence is reasonable; presumption.

Select Usage (details) :



Issue Preclusion Analysis for Double Jeapardy cartoons image illustration picture
Issue Preclusion Analysis for Double Jeapardy

Description:
Yeager v. United States; Although acquittals may preclude retrial on counts on which the same jury hangs, the consideration of hung counts has no place in the issue preclusion analysis for double jeopardy purposes; hung jury.

Select Usage (details) :



Scope of Vehicle Search Incident to Arrest cartoons image illustration picture
Scope of Vehicle Search Incident to Arrest

Description:
Arizona v. Gant; Police may search vehicle incident to recent occupant's arrest only if arrestee is within reaching distance of passenger compartment at time of search and reasonable to believe vehicle contains evidence of offense of arrest.

Select Usage (details) :



Knock and Announce Rule Waiting Time cartoons image illustration picture
Knock and Announce Rule Waiting Time

Description:
Hudson v. Michigan; exclusionary rule not apply suppress evidence obtained in violation knock-and-announce rule; exclusionary rule; fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine; inevitable discovery rule; no-knock search warrant.

Select Usage (details) :



Waiving Right to Counsel Post Indictment cartoons image illustration picture
Waiving Right to Counsel Post Indictment

Description:
Patterson v. Illinois; Whatever warnings suffice for Miranda's purposes will also be sufficient to safeguard the right to counsel in the context of post-indictment questioning; indict; sixth amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



Can Impeach with Inadmissable Evidence cartoons image illustration picture
Can Impeach with Inadmissable Evidence

Description:
Kansas v. Ventris; An informant's testimony, elicited in violation of the Sixth Amendment, is admissible to challenge the defendant's inconsistent testimony at trial; impeach.

Select Usage (details) :



Fruit of the Poisonous Tree cartoons image illustration picture
Fruit of the Poisonous Tree

Description:
When a vehicle is stopped at a traffic stop, the passenger as well as the driver is seized within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment for search and seizure.

Select Usage (details) :



Fourth Amendment cartoons image illustration picture
Fourth Amendment

Description:
Bond v. United States; search warrant is required before police can physically manipulate items.

Select Usage (details) :



Knock and Announce cartoons image illustration picture
Knock and Announce

Description:
United States v. Banks; Fourth Amendment; officers knocked and announced and then forcibly entered after reasonable suspicion of exigency had ripened.

Select Usage (details) :



Grand Jury cartoons image illustration picture
Grand Jury

Description:
United States v. Awadallah; a grand jury may issue an arrest warrant.

Select Usage (details) :



Totality of the Circumstances cartoons image illustration picture
Totality of the Circumstances

Description:
United States v. Arvizu; reasonable suspicion is based on the totality of the circumstances.

Select Usage (details) :



Reasonable Cause cartoons image illustration picture
Reasonable Cause

Description:
United States v. Knights; consent to future searches is a permitted condition of probation.

Select Usage (details) :



Search Warrant cartoons image illustration picture
Search Warrant

Description:
Illinois v. McArthur; a person may be kept out of his home while the police obtain a search warrant.

Select Usage (details) :



Special Needs Search cartoons image illustration picture
Special Needs Search

Description:
Ferguson v. City of Charleston; drug test of a pregnant woman in a doctor's office is not a special needs search.

Select Usage (details) :



Checkpoints cartoons image illustration picture
Checkpoints

Description:
Illinois v. Lidster; traffic checkpoints may be part of a criminal investigation.

Select Usage (details) :



Hacking Computers Is Not Wiretapping cartoons image illustration picture
Hacking Computers Is Not Wiretapping

Description:
United States v. Steiger; computer hacking is not wiretapping; Stored Communications Act, the Wiretap Act.

Select Usage (details) :



Compulsion of Testimony cartoons image illustration picture
Compulsion of Testimony

Description:
McKune v. Lile; limiting inmate privileges is not compution of testimony. Fifth Amendment. Right to remain silent. Miranda.

Select Usage (details) :



Criminal Procedure cartoons image illustration picture
Criminal Procedure

Description:
Fellers v. United States; the Fifth Amendment and Sixth Amendment have different tests for admissibility.

Select Usage (details) :



Right to Counsel cartoons image illustration picture
Right to Counsel

Description:
Texas v. Cobb; the Sixth Amendment right to counsel only attaches to the offense charged.

Select Usage (details) :



Jurisdictional Defect cartoons image illustration picture
Jurisdictional Defect

Description:
United States v. Cotton; failure to state the amount of drugs in an indictment is not a jurisdictional defect.

Select Usage (details) :



Minimum Sentence Enhancement cartoons image illustration picture
Minimum Sentence Enhancement

Description:
Harris v. United States; fact that increase a minimum sentence do not need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Select Usage (details) :



Trial Strategy cartoons image illustration picture
Trial Strategy

Description:
Wiggins v. Smith; trial strategy must be supported by reasonable investigation.

Select Usage (details) :



Authority to Detain cartoons image illustration picture
Authority to Detain

Description:
Padilla v. Rumsfeld; Congress must provide authority to detain someone on US soil.

Select Usage (details) :



Ineffective Assistance of Counsel cartoons image illustration picture
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Description:
Massaro v. United States; ineffective assistance claims may be raised collaterally.

Select Usage (details) :



Attachment of Right To Counsel cartoons image illustration picture
Attachment of Right To Counsel

Description:
Rothgery v. Gillespie County. A criminal defendant’s initial appearance before a judicial officer, where he learns the charge against him and his liberty is subject to restriction, marks the start of adversary judicial proceedings that trigger the attac

Select Usage (details) :



Reasonably Effective Assistance of Counsel cartoons image illustration picture
Reasonably Effective Assistance of Counsel

Description:
Harrington v. Richter; An unreasonable application of federal law is different from an incorrect application. State courts must be given some leeway. Strickland v. Washington. Strickland standard.

Select Usage (details) :



Right to Counsel Class Action cartoons image illustration picture
Right to Counsel Class Action

Description:
Hurrell-Harring v. State of New York; class action permitted as state must provide legal representation to indigent criminal defendants at all critical stages of the proceedings against them.

Select Usage (details) :



Fourth Amendment Search cartoons image illustration picture
Fourth Amendment Search

Description:
United States v. Jones; the definition of a Fourth Amendment “search” evolves with advances in technology. GPS. Karo. Katz.

Select Usage (details) :



Exigent Circumstances Rule cartoons image illustration picture
Exigent Circumstances Rule

Description:
Kentucky v. King; The exigent-circumstances rule applies only when the police do not gain entry to the premises by means of an actual or threatened violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Select Usage (details) :



Fourth Amendment Email Protection cartoons image illustration picture
Fourth Amendment Email Protection

Description:
United States v. Warshak; email is subject to the Fourth Amendment so will protect an individual’s privacy interest. A search warrant is necessary. Katz. Miller. Jackson.

Select Usage (details) :



Age as Miranda Custody Factor cartoons image illustration picture
Age as Miranda Custody Factor

Description:
J.D.B. v. North Carolina; A child’s age properly informs the Miranda custody analysis because children may not feel free to terminate interrogation.

Select Usage (details) :



Presumption of Involuntariness cartoons image illustration picture
Presumption of Involuntariness

Description:
Maryland v. Shatzer; a break in custody ends the presumption of involuntariness established by Edwards v. Arizona.

Select Usage (details) :



Invoke Miranda Rights cartoons image illustration picture
Invoke Miranda Rights

Description:
Berghuis v. Thompkins; a suspect invoking his Miranda rights must do so unambiguously.

Select Usage (details) :



Joinder of Criminal Charges cartoons image illustration picture
Joinder of Criminal Charges

Description:
State v. Pereira; joinder of offenses; joinder of criminal charges with multiple offenses is proper when the offenses charged (1) are of the same or similar character; or (2) are based on the same act or transaction, or on two or more acts or transactions

Select Usage (details) :



Pretrial Publicity cartoons image illustration picture
Pretrial Publicity

Description:
Skilling v. United States; For purposes of obtaining a fair trial, it is sufficient if the jurors can lay aside their impressions or opinions and render a verdict based on the evidence presented in court.

Select Usage (details) :



Double Jeopardy Clause cartoons image illustration picture
Double Jeopardy Clause

Description:
Renico v. Lett; trail judge is entitled to deference in declaring a mistrial due to jury deadlock.

Select Usage (details) :



Federal Habeas Standard cartoons image illustration picture
Federal Habeas Standard

Description:
Harrington v. Richter; when the state court’s decision is unaccompanied by explanation, the petitioner’s burden must be met by showing there was no reasonable basis for the state court to deny relief.

Select Usage (details) :



Apprendi v. New Jersey cartoons image illustration picture
Apprendi v. New Jersey

Description:
Due process considerations of Fifth Amendment, applied to states through Fourteenth Amendment, requires an increase in maximum prison sentence to be based on facts found by jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidentiary hearing; hate crime.

Select Usage (details) :