Prior to South Carolina v. Gathers (1989) 490 U.S. 805, Booth v. Maryland (1987) 482 U.S. 496, and Payne v. Tennessee (1991) 501 U.S. 808, victims did not have a voice in criminal cases other than reporting a crime, and testifying at trial. Unlike the offender, victims were relegated to sit in abeyance until the trial was over. In Linda R.S. v. Richard D. (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a crime victim couldn’t coerce a criminal prosecution because "a private citizen lacks a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another" (Donahoe, 1999). This case supported the fact that victims had little to no legal rights within a court of law. The U.S. Constitution recognizes rights for someone who commits a …show more content…
In South Carolina v. Gathers (1989), the court had to decide whether a victim impact statement could be introduced if it related to the crime. Believing so, the prosecutor rather than the victim’s family presented to the jury personal attributes concerning the victim and how the family felt the crime and the defendant. The prosecutor also read from a religious tract that was in the victim’s possession. The major difference in Gathers and Booth is the manner in which the information was presented. In Payne v. Tennessee (1991), the Supreme Court stated that the state made a mistake in their interpretation of Booth, and, as a result, misapplied the ruling of the Supreme Court to their case. They further stated, “In the majority of cases, and in this case, victim impact evidence serves entirely legitimate purposes. In the event that evidence is introduced that is so unduly prejudicial that it renders the trial fundamentally unfair, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides a mechanism for …show more content…
Tennessee (1991), the Supreme Court made significant changes in how Supreme Court cases would be interpreted, as well as changing the court's stance on victim impact statements and the Eighth Amendment. The court held that the Eighth Amendment does not prohibit a capital sentencing jury from hearing victim impact statements and the effects the crime has on family members. The U.S. Supreme Court developed the law governing the use of victim impact statements by authorizing courts to begin allowing the statements as evidence. The Supreme Court revolutionized its way of thinking and began to recognize the rights of victims just as the court recognized the rights of
Case: South Carolina v. Christopher Frank Pittman (Findlaw, 2008) Facts: That Pittman, shot and morality wounded both his grandparents, Joe Frank and Joy Pittman, with a .410 shotgun. Appellant was 12 years old at time of alleged incident, he was abandoned by his mother, and his relationship with his father was abusive. Prior to moving in with grandparents, appellant had been committed to an inpatient facility, where he was on the antidepressant Paxil, soon he was released and permitted to live with grandparents (Findlaw, 2008). .
Coker V. Georgia is a supreme court case that took place in 1977. Ehrlich Anthony Coker also known as Coker, was already serving multiple life sentences for rape, murder, assault, and kidnapping. (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/433/584/case.html) But Coker escaped through the roof of a building where a meeting was being held on September 2. (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/433/584/case.html).
Batson v. Kentucky James Baton was charged with the receipt of stolen property and burglary by the State of Kentucky. The prosecutor for the case used peremptory challenge to dismiss four African American jurors from the selection group resulting in an all white jury. Batson claimed that the removal of the black jurors violated his right to a fair trail under the Equal Protection Clause. He was subsequently convicted on all charges by the State of Kentucky (Findlaw | Cases and Codes, n.d.).
Shane’s assessment was corroborated by descriptions of battered woman syndrome in various forms of literature, helping the jury understand the extent of Lavallee’s mental state that was affected by the abuse and the reasons for her action. After reviewing the evidence, the Court stated that “ Expert testimony is admissible to assist the fact-finder in drawing inferences in areas where the expert has relevant knowledge or experience beyond that of the lay person” (R v. Lavallee, [1990] 1 SCR 852), because this applied to the jury’s process in deciding, by allowing them to understand the components of battered woman syndrome. Furthermore, a new trial would be unnecessary because the Court reasoned that both the jury and the trial judge were presented with enough admissible evidence to know that Lavallee was battered repeatedly and brutally by Rust throughout their relationship.
Faisal Alanazi Prof. Meredith Doench ENG 200 11/1/15 Annotated Bibliography Robertson, Campbell. " Deal Frees ‘West Memphis Three’ in Arkansas. " The New York Times, Aug 19 (2011). Web.
Pursing this argument further about the use of informant’s I would now like to observe the credibility of an informant is yet another attribute that leads to the wrongful conviction of the innocent. In the case of North Carolina vs. Darryl Hunt, there were multiple informants used to testify in case. Darryl Hunt who was wrongly convicted at just the age of 19 back in 1984 and spent 19 years of his life locked away after he was accused of the murder of young white beautiful Deborah Sykes a newspaper editor at the time. Although Darryl had DNA testing to prove his innocents, judicial system place the blame on this young, at the time African American male, in order to come to a resolution. Throughout the Darryl Hunt case there were faulty eyewitness testimonies that not only corrupted the
Questions Be sure to answer every component of each of the below questions 1. Identify which documentary you have chosen. Describe in detail what transpired in your chosen case including the crime, the witnesses and the overall case against the defendant. Also be sure to include the verdict and/or the sentence. I have chosen to describe Spousal Abuse, Assault with a Deadly Weapon, Attempted Carjacking: People v. Alfred Garcia.
3. Discuss the issue regarding the victims ' rights to notification regarding important proceeding, decisions, and actions related to their case. Under the first category of Victim’s Rights, known as The Right to be Informed, the textbook states, “all states provide victims with the right to be notified about important proceedings, decisions, and actions related to their case” (Hemmens, Brody, & Spohn, 2013). This includes the following victims are to be informed of: time and place of court proceedings, release of a defendant from custody, dismissal of charges, negotiating plea agreements, sentence imposed, and the defendant’s final release from confinement. However, issues can occur with notification from prosecutors to the victim.
The state of South Carolina has followed the nation’s trend of increasing police brutality against minority groups. African Americans are the most targeted minority for police brutality. The first official slave patrol was formed in South Carolina and was a prelude to the modern police department. The fact that modern police departments has its roots in what was a racist practice of monitoring and beating African American slaves into submission or preventing the escape of slaves from their white owners it is not a stretch for a modern South Carolinian police department to have retained a racist attitude.
victim and the defendant may be influential without clear guidance about the deliberation rules. Black suspects and White victims; blacks were more likely to receive a death sentence vs White suspects and black victims “Not only did killing a White person rather than a Black person increase the likelihood of being sentenced to death, but also Black defendants were more likely than White defendants to be sentenced to death” (Eberhaedt, 2006). Peter Neufeld and Barry Scheck founded The innocence Project, in 1992, their mission was to free those who were wrongly convicted of crimes through DNA. To date. there are approximately 350 people exonerated of crimes they didn’t commit through the Innocence project.
The common thread is the finding of vulnerability based on a factor that is completely separate and distinct from the underlying offense. Conditions that make a three-year old more vulnerable than an eleven-year old can support the application of the vulnerable victim enhancement. For example, in United States v. Grubbs, the Fourth Circuit upheld the vulnerable victim enhancement because the defendant lured his victims by giving them higher grades and gifts and enticing them with the promise of scholarships. Similarly, in United States v. Willoughby, the Sixth Circuit held that a sixteen-year old girl was vulnerable because she was a homeless runaway with a history of abuse and neglect. In United States v. Irving, the Second Circuit applied the vulnerable victim enhancement because the victims were homeless, impoverished, and without parental or other appropriate
It took nine years for the jury to realize Bloodsworth was innocent. This shows our preamble has a flaw if people are sentencing other to jail even though they're innocent, causing the innocent to rot in jail wrongfully.
The victim right’s movement of the 1980’s demonstrated a shift in the Judicial and Law Enforcement practices from Rights of the accused to rights of the victim. The fundamental right of the victim was to be represented equitably throughout the criminal justice process. There are four basic rights of the victims that are the right or information and notification, participation, the right to feel and be reasonably protected and
It can be argued that the jury was not a proper representation of his peers. Along with other factual errors surrounding Dixon’s false conviction,
So, in many, if not most, of the cases, the accusers and the accused were unacquainted. Boyer and