Sixth Amendment right to counsel applies to everyone, but it can be difficult to ensure that it is correctly applied to defendants with disabilities. That has led to major problems, and has been addressed by several cases, including Faretta v. California (1975), McKaskle v. Wiggins (1984), Godinez v. Moran (1993), and Indiana v. Edwards (2008). These cases showcased the issue that the standard for competency to stand trial was linked to the standard for competency to represent oneself. While that seems to make perfect sense, it is actually quite harmful to people who have disabilities, because they may not be able to correctly represent themselves and cannot always be held to the same standards that would be seen with people who do not suffer from any kind of disability. The right to counsel is highly important, because not having counsel can make it very difficult for a defendant to assert….

Hearsay evidence and the Confrontation Clause of Amendment VI.
The main objective of the American constitutional provision under study was: prevention of ex-parte affidavit deposition, which was employed against prisoners in place of personal questioning and cross-questioning of witnesses. (CS/LII Annotated Constitution Sixth Amendment).

The main objectives that this paper will look at include:

The confrontation right is one among the basic assurances of liberty and life

The 6th Amendment's Confrontation Clause assures one key aspect of the process of adversarial trial (Sixth Amendment -- ights of Accused in Criminal Prosecutions)

Challenging questions pertaining to these rights' limits and scope

A set of principles may be derived from available Maryland appeals court and U.S. Supreme Court cases connected with the clause, for aiding busy practitioners or trial judges with speedy and accurate analysis of potential issues relating to it, even right in the midst of trial, where there is no room for calm deliberation.

1. One….

Hearsay evidence and the Confrontation Clause of Amendment VI.
The main objective of the American constitutional provision under study was: prevention of ex-parte affidavit deposition, which was employed against prisoners in place of personal questioning and cross-questioning of witnesses. (CS/LII Annotated Constitution Sixth Amendment).

The main objectives that this paper will look at include:

The confrontation right is one among the basic assurances of liberty and life

The 6th Amendment's Confrontation Clause assures one key aspect of the process of adversarial trial (Sixth Amendment -- ights of Accused in Criminal Prosecutions)

Challenging questions pertaining to these rights' limits and scope

A set of principles may be derived from available Maryland appeals court and U.S. Supreme Court cases connected with the clause, for aiding busy practitioners or trial judges with speedy and accurate analysis of potential issues relating to it, even right in the midst of trial, where there is no room for calm deliberation.

One issue….

Introduction The Sixth Amendment provides for the rights of criminal defendants. An accused person has a right to a lawyer. All state courts have to provide legal counsel for the defendant if they cannot afford to hire their own. Lack of legal representation is an infringement on the Accused's right to representation and fair trial. The Supreme Court set this precedence in Gideon v. Wainwright by ruling that people accused of felonies must be provided with a lawyer if they cannot afford one. 
Gideon v. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
Background of the case
In 1961, Clarence Earl Gideon was accused of robbing a pool hall and stood trial in Florida State Trial Court (the court of original jurisdiction). However, Gideon could not afford a lawyer to represent him in court. He requested the court seeking that he be provided with a lawyer. An issue arose because the Florida State Trial Court only provided lawyers for those accused of….

Amendment
The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution offers a set of protections from a potentially overbearing criminal justice system. The amendment reads as:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense[footnoteRef:1]. [1: (Cornell University Law School)]

The law protects individuals from allegations of criminal conduct that are false by providing them a public trial by their peers.

The concept of a jury trial is not a new phenomenon and has its roots that date back to the ancient republics.….

Outside of court, this takes place by way of affidavits and depositions (Sanders, 2007).
The Amendment's final part assures the accused person the right to aid of counsel. Legal representation was once a benefit only accessible to the rich. The poor were frequently left to their own devices in English courts. While defendants in America can decide to represent themselves, the right to counsel gives one the right to gratis legal help. In criminal trials, poor defendants are given legal counsel. Nationwide, community legal services, legal aid societies and other factions help the poor deal with civil issues. No matter how well the founding fathers' accomplished on their plan, our judicial system is not ideal. It is well-known that injustices and frustrations are daily legal incidences. Even so, the framers made enormous progress for daily citizens through the 6th Amendment to make sure American courts truly are the people's courts….

' Schmerber, 384 U.S. At 772, 769-70. In other words, the burden on law enforcement officers is high if they want to perform a search within the Fourth Amendments' protections.
The Fifth Amendment guarantees that no American "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." Confessions are inherently suspect, and methods of getting confessions have not always been reliable. In modern times, police forces have professional standards produced by respect for the Constitution. Police realize that society in general abhors the use of involuntary confessions and wants to limit police power against individual citizens. The Fifth Amendment also reinforces the idea that while police officers are enforcing the law they also need to follow the law and play fair. "In the end, life and liberty can be as much endangered from illegal methods used to convict those thought to be criminals as from the actual criminals….

S. Constitution began yet another short-lived experiment with prohibition, only this time it was on a national level. hen it went into effect in January 1920, efforts to repeal the 18th Amendment began almost immediately. In a whirlwind of legislative activity, the 21st Amendment was ratified by the requisite number of states in record time. In their haste to repeal the 18th Amendment, though, lawmakers failed to consider the impact of section two as it might apply to interstate commerce in the Age of Information, but given the heated nature of the debate at the time, they can perhaps be forgiven this legislative oversight in the 21st century. All in all, though, the research clearly showed that the U.S. Constitution remains a living document that is capable of responding to changes in American society.
orks Cited

Bryce, Jenny. (2000). "Prohibition in the United States." History Review, 37.

Eng, Gordon. (2003). "Old hine in….

Sugar and leaf litter appeared to have an inhibitory effect, except in the area of root mass. These results were similar to those obtained by Levy & Taylor (2003). Their study also found an inhibitory effect in treatments with municipal wastes and pulp mill wastes. Similar to the results of this study, their tests found that horse and mink manure resulted in the greatest improvement in plant growth. However, Muenchang and associates (2006) found the sugar mill by-products improved the nitrogen fixing ability of plants by encouraging the development of certain bacteria on the roots.
There are many field trials that are similar to those conducted in this study. Tuber yield and size were not affected significantly by the application of straw mulch on potatoes (Doring, et al., 2005). However, La Mondia and associates (1999) found that straw applied to potatoes increased yield in tubers exposed to certain potato pathogens.….

Or, as Saletan points out, those three elements "by deduction, are the due process test" (2011).
But this ought to leave a bad taste in one's mouth because all three of these elements can be manipulated to violate one's due process right.

"hich leaves us with an awkward bottom line. If the target is a suspected terrorist, "imminence" can be redefined to justify killing him. If the weapon is a drone, feasibility of arrest has already been ruled out -- that's why the drone has been sent to do the job. So in any drone strike on a U.S. citizen suspected of terrorism, only one of the three questions we supposedly apply to such cases is really open: Has he been fighting alongside al-Qaida? If he has, we can kill him. That's the same rule we apply to foreigners. In effect, citizenship doesn't matter. The "due process" test is empty" (Saletan….

obbery Scenario
In this particular scenario, the police stopped a driver based upon the fact that the driver matched the description of the cashier who was the victim of the robbery and the driver had an Alabama student parking sticker (the store's robber was wearing a cap and a t-shirt from this university). The suspect was not speeding when the license was obtained, it should be noted. But the actions of the officer were consistent with stop-and-identify laws which permit police to ask suspects for licenses or other identification.

Supreme Court has generally not looked favorably upon stop-and-identify laws when they have been under its review. In the case of Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1983), one of the most recent stop-and-identify cases, the statute was deemed "unconstitutionally vague on its face within the meaning of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by failing to clarify what is contemplated….

Bennett v. MetroFacts of the CaseIn Bennett v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, the court found that the government employer had the right to discipline the employee, Vicky Bennett, for her Facebook post, which contained racially charged language and could be construed as impeding the mission of the government agency where she worked. Bennett argued that she had a right to free speech, protected by the First Amendment. Her employer believed that as a face of Metro she should have refrained from suggestive verbiage that would reflect poorly on the enterprise. The issue came down to what are known as Pickering factors, which weigh the employee\\\'s interest in free speech against the employer\\\'s interest in promoting the efficiency of public services (Oluwole, 2007). The Pickering test is a legal framework to balance the competing interests of public employees in free speech and government employers in maintaining an efficient….

Judge roderick concluded that the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment does not give a defendant the right to require immunization of a witness, but that such a right is "probably" contained in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Id. However, he declined to accord the defendants the benefit of this "probable" Fifth Amendment right to defense witness immunity for two reasons. First, he ruled that the defendants' motion was untimely, since it should properly have been made at the beginning of the trial. Second, he concluded that defense witness immunity would be available only to secure testimony that was material and exculpatory and that the defendants had not shown that any of the witnesses for whom they sought immunity would give material, exculpatory testimony."
The only federal appellate decisions that have ruled in favor of defense witness immunity are stated to appear to be the Third….

Montejo v. Louisiana, 556 U.S. 778, 129 S. Ct. 2079, 173 L. Ed. 2D 955
Jesse Montejo and Jerry Moore were interrupted during a burglary by the owner of the residence, Lewis Ferrari (U.S. Supreme Court, 2009). Montejo was picked up for questioning the next day and after waiving his rights under Miranda v. Arizona (384 U.S. 436, 1966), admitted to shooting and killing Lewis Ferrari during the burglary. When Montejo was arraigned two days later in court, he stood mute as the court appointed counsel.

A few hours after the arraignment, police detectives visited Montejo at the jail (U.S. Supreme Court, 2009). During the end of the ensuing discussion, Montejo waved his Miranda rights and agreed to take them to the murder weapon. During the trip to locate the murder weapon, Montejo wrote a letter of apology to the victim's widow.

The defense attempted to suppress the letter of apology during the….

Protecting Liberty
Individual rights

Bill of ights defines the protections afforded individual citizens under the Constitution against excessive government intrusions into private lives and arbitrary prosecutions. These rights are contained in the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Since these Amendments were first adopted by the ratifying states the courts have interpreted the intent of each and created rules that attempt to keep the government from running roughshod over these rights. In 1944, the Federal ules of Criminal Procedures were generated by the Supreme Court and Congress turned them into law (LII, 2010).

One of the most important rights is to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment (LII, 2010). A warrant issued by a magistrate or judge is typically required before a police officer can enter a private citizen's residence or other property and conduct a search. In addition, the focus of the search….