Final_Exam_Study_Guide

Confession

When a person implicates themselves in criminal activity following police questioning and/or interrogation.

Admission

When a person can simply admit to involvement in a crime without any police encouragement.

Due process voluntariness approach

The requirement that any confession be voluntary under the "totality of circumstances."

Brown v

Police officers resorted to whippings and other brutal methods in order to obtain confessions from three Black defendants who were later convicted based on their confessions alone. The Supreme Court analyzed this case under the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause and found the convictions invalid because the interrogation techniques had been so offensive.

Williams v

It had been made patently clear that physical brutality to coerce a confession violates the Fourteenth Amendment.

Colorado v

Typically, a confession will be considered involuntary if (1) the police subject the suspect to coercive conduct and (2) the conduct is sufficient to overcome the will of the suspect. The court will also look at the totality of circumstances to determine if the suspect's vulnerabilities and condition, coupled with the police conduct, led to giving an involuntary confession.

Messiah v

Established the rule that the Sixth Amendment's guarantee to counsel in all "formal criminal proceedings" is violated when the government "deliberately elicits" incriminating responses from a person.

Deliberate elicitation

Is a tactic in which officers create a situation likely to induce a suspect into making an incriminating statement.

United States v

The Supreme Court focused on whether the officers "intentionally creat[ed] a situation likely to induce Henry [the defendant] to make incriminating statements without the assistance of counsel."

Formal criminal proceedings

In the Sixth Amendment right to counsel context, either a formal charge, a preliminary hearing, indictment, information, or arraignment.

Fair examination rule

The requirement that a witness, including the defendant, at either a trial or a grand jury hearing can be compelled to answer questions once he or she waives Fifth Amendment protection and begins to testify.

Testimonial evidence

For Fifth Amendment purposes, "testimonial evidence" is loosely defined to include incriminating statements made at any point during the criminal justice process, whether or not the person making such statements is under oath.

Physical evidence

The opposite of testimonial evidence. Physical evidence can include murder weapons, documents, and even results from police lineups.

Miranda v

The Court announced the following important rule:"[T]he prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination (emphasis added). This wording clearly established that the Fifth Amendment should serve as the basis for determining the constitutionality of a confession.

Miranda warnings

While there are some variations, the Miranda warnings contain four elements:(1) You have the right to remain silent; (2) anything you say can be used against you in court; (3) you have the right to talk to an attorney and to have the attorney with you during questioning; and (4) if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you.

Custody

Typically an arrest. Custody is important in the Miranda context because Miranda warnings do not need to be read if a person is not in custody.

Berkermer v

In determining whether a person is in "custody," the Supreme Court has held that "the only relevant inquiry is how a reasonable man in the suspect's position would have understood his situation".

California v

The Court offered some clarification concerning its decision in Mathiason. It pointed out that Miranda is not implicated "if the suspect is not placed under arrest, voluntarily comes to the police station, and is allowed to leave unhindered by the police after a brief interview."

Interrogation

Express questioning (e.g., Where were you on the night of the crime?) or the functional equivalent of a question (see definition). The definition of interrogation is important in the Miranda context because Miranda warnings do not need to be read if a person is not technically interrogated.

Rhode Island v

The Court noted that interrogation "must reflect

Plea

A plea in which the defendant claims responsibility for the crime with which he or she has been charged.

Not guilty

A plea in which the defendant does not claim responsibility for the crime with which he or she has been charged.

Nolo contendere

A plea similar to guilty with a literal meaning of “I do not desire to contest the action.”

Allocution

When the defendant explains to the judge exactly what he or she did and why.

Discovery

The process by which each party to a case learns of the evidence that the opposition will present.

Williams v

The Court considered Florida’s notice of alibi statute.

United States v

The defense attempted to call a private investigator to the stand.

Wardius v

The Court held that the prosecution must provide the defense with a list of witnesses.

Nonreciprocal discovery

Discovery that benefits one side in a criminal case, but not the other.

Brady v

The Supreme Court drastically altered its previous decisions concerning the prosecution’s duty to disclose exculpatory evidence.

Arizona v

The Supreme Court clarified the third factor—the motivation of the prosecution.

Prosecutorial discretion

A prosecutor’s authority to decide whether to proceed with criminal charges against a particular suspect.

Information

The prosecutor’s formal charging document and the alternative to a grand jury indictment.

Selective prosecution

When an individual is targeted for prosecution merely because he or she falls into a certain group.

Oyler v

The Court held that the prosecution’s selection of cases violates the equal protection clause only when it is intentional.

Pretextual prosecution

When the prosecutor lacks the evidence to charge someone with a particular crime and so charges him or her with a lesser crime.

Vindictive prosecution

Prosecution based on revenge.

Blackledge v

The defendant was convicted in a lower court for misdemeanor assault with deadly weapon.

Trial de novo

A type of appeal in which an appellate court holds a new trial as if the prior trial never occurred.

Joinder

When the prosecutor either brings multiple charges against the same individual in the same trial or brings charges against multiple individuals in the same trial.

Severance

The opposite of joinder.

United States v

If this joinder has “a substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict,” then new and separate trials must be held.

Indictment

A formal, written accusation submitted to the court by a grand jury.

Grand jury

A body of people selected to hear evidence against an accused person and determine whether there is sufficient evidence to bring the case to trial.

Hurtado v

The Supreme Court stated that indictment by a grand jury is not a right guaranteed by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

True bill

The grand jury’s endorsement that it found sufficient evidence to warrant a criminal charge.

Taylor v

The Court held that the “systematic exclusion” of a “large distinct group” from the pool from which the jury is chosen violates the Sixth Amendment.

Rose v

The Court held that the “right to equal protection of the law is denied when the defendant is indicted from a grand jury from which members of a racial group purposefully have been excluded.”

Butterworth v

The Supreme Court declared that the First Amendment may provide an exception to the grand jury secrecy requirement.

United States v

Grand jury witnesses and the targets of grand jury investigations generally are not guaranteed a right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment.

United States v

A grand jury “may compel the production of evidence or the testimony of witnesses as it considers appropriate.”

Subpoena ad testificandum

A subpoena that compels a witness to appear before the grand jury.

Subpoena duces tecum

A subpoena that compels the production of tangible evidence.

Hale v

Due process clause

The constitutional principle that guarantees fair treatment and protection of individual rights in legal proceedings.

Speedy trial

The right of a defendant to have a trial conducted without unnecessary delay.

Impartial judge

A judge who is unbiased and capable of making decisions based solely on the law.

Pecuniary interest

A financial interest or stake in the outcome of a case.

Impartial jury

A jury that is capable of making a decision based solely on the facts of the case.

Noncriminal proceeding rule

The rule that limits juries to criminal trials and excludes them from certain steps of the criminal process.

Juvenile delinquency hearings

Hearings for juveniles charged with delinquent acts, which do not require a jury trial.

Petty crime

A minor offense that does not carry a severe punishment.

Unanimous decision

A decision reached by all members of a jury in agreement.

Jury list

The master list from which prospective jurors are selected.

Jury panel

The list of individuals drawn from the jury list who are subpoenaed for jury service.

Systematic exclusion

The exclusion of a distinctive group from jury service, which goes beyond significant exclusion.

Fair cross-section challenge

A challenge that requires the defendant to prove underrepresentation of a distinctive group in the jury-selection process.

Distinctive group

Historically protected groups, such as women and minorities, that should not be excluded from jury service.

Voir dire

The process of selecting jurors for service, which includes questioning by the judge and challenges for cause.

Challenge for cause

A means of excluding prospective jurors who cannot be impartial.

Actual bias

The demonstration of a juror's prejudice or partiality that would prevent them from being fair and impartial.

Peremptory challenges

A means of excluding prospective jurors without providing a reason.

Batson challenge

A challenge that requires prosecutors to explain their use of peremptory challenges to exclude minorities.

Public trial

A trial that is open to the public and complies with the Sixth Amendment's public trial provision.

Openness

The requirement for trials and other hearings to be accessible to the public.

Change of venue

The process of moving a trial to another jurisdiction, often due to concerns about pretrial publicity.

Jury sequestration

The process of confining jurors during a trial to limit their exposure to outside influences.

Gag order

A judicial order limiting what the press and parties can disclose about a case until the proceedings are completed.

Confrontation

The defendant's right to be present at trial, hear live testimony, and challenge adverse witnesses' statements.

Physical presence

The requirement for the defendant to be physically present at their trial.

Mental competence

The requirement for the defendant to be mentally competent to adequately confront adverse witnesses.

Competency to Stand Trial

The test used to determine whether a defendant is mentally competent to stand trial, assessing their ability to consult with their lawyer and understand the proceedings against them.

Live Testimony

The requirement that adverse witnesses provide testimony in person during a trial.

Unavailable Witness

A witness who permanently moves to another country, cannot be located after a careful search, or suffers from a lapse in memory.

Hearsay Exceptions

Exceptions to the rule that hearsay is not admissible in a criminal trial, allowing certain statements to be admitted as evidence.

Confrontation Clause

The right of the defendant to face their accusers and cross-examine witnesses against them.

Compulsory Process

The right of the defendant to compel the production of witnesses and evidence in their favor.

Double Jeopardy

The protection against being prosecuted or punished multiple times for the same offense.

Same Offense

Two offenses that have the same elements and cannot result in separate convictions without violating double jeopardy.

Blockburger Rule

The rule used to determine whether two offenses are the same for double jeopardy purposes, based on whether each offense requires proof of an additional fact that the other does not.

Entrapment Defense

A criminal defense based on the belief that the government instigated the crime and the defendant should not be convicted.

Entrapment defense

A legal defense that argues that a person should not be held criminally liable if they were induced or coerced by government officials to commit a crime.

Predisposition test

A standard used to determine whether entrapment occurred, focusing on whether the defendant was already inclined or predisposed to commit the crime before the government's involvement.

Indeterminate sentencing

A sentencing strategy where the judge has the authority to set the sentence without specific limitations or guidelines.

Determinate sentencing

A sentencing strategy where the judge sets a fixed sentence that cannot be altered by a parole board.

Mandatory sentencing

A sentencing strategy where the law, rather than the judge, determines the sentence, leaving no discretion to the judge.

Sentencing guidelines

State and federal rules used to set sentences based on the severity of the offense and the offender's prior record, aiming to strike a balance between determinate and indeterminate sentencing.

Bifurcated trial

A trial process in death penalty cases that separates the guilt determination phase from the sentencing phase.

Harmless error

A mistake made during a trial that has no significant impact on the outcome or the defendant's guilt or innocence.

Habeas corpus

A legal procedure that allows individuals to challenge the constitutionality of their confinement, serving as an alternative to appealing.