Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GRIFFIN v. CALIFORNIA 380 U.S. 609 (1965) Case Brief.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. In re Richard A. ALCORN and Steven Feola Supreme Court of Arizona, 202 Ariz. 62, 41 P.3d 600.
Advertisements

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against SCHAFER Supreme Court of Washington, 149 Wash.2d 148,
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. JIMENEZ RECIO 537 U.S. 270 (2003) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. Willard JOHNSON U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 327 F.3d 554 (2003) Case Brief.
Chapter 4: Enforcing the Law 4 How Can Disputes Be Resolved Privately?
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. COURCHESNE Supreme Court of Connecticut, 262 Conn. 537, 816 A.2d 562 (2003) Case.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. BUTLER 19 Ohio St.2d 55, 249 N.E.2d 818 (1969) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE OF OKLAHOMA ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. TWEEDY, Supreme Court of Oklahoma 2000.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. DECK v. MISSOURI 125 S.Ct (2005) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. PEOPLE v. DLUGASH 41 N.Y.2d 725, 363 N.E.2d 1155 (N.Y. 1977) Case Brief.
Introduction to the Grand Jury ACG 6935/4939. What in the world is a Grand Jury.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. PONDER v. GRAHAM 4 Fla. 23 (1851) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BLANTON v. CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 489 U.S. 538 (1989) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. COLBY v. CARNEY HOSPITAL 356 Mass. 527, 254 N.E.2d 407 (1969) Case Brief.
The Fourth and Fifth Amendments How do they protect our rights?
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1.6 FIFTH AMENDMENT. Fifth Amendment "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment.
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED. I. OVERVIEW A. Due Process: The government, in whatever it does, must act fairly and follow established rules. 1.5 th Amendment:
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BROWN v. SOUTHLAND 620 F.Supp (E.D.Mo. 1985) Case Brief.
Courtroom Terms Twelve Angry Men. 10/18/2015 copyright ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 2 Amendments 5 th Amendment: Guarantees due process—each.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. PENNSYLVANIA v. BRUDER 488 U.S. 9 (1988) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. Pamela L. PETERS Supreme Court of Wisconsin, 263 Wis.2d 475, 665 N.W.2d 171 (2003)
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. MASSACHUSETTS v. SHEPPARD 468 U.S. 981 (1984) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. CARRUTHERS v. STATE Supreme Court of Georgia, 528 S.E.2d 217 (2000) Case Brief.
 Bill of Rights  Rights apply in both state and federal criminal proceedings  Required by Constitution, not state/federal law 2UNT in partnership with.
1. 2 Copyright and Terms of Service Copyright © Texas Education Agency, These materials are copyrighted © and trademarked ™ as the property of the.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE FARM v. CAMPBELL 538 U.S. 408 (2003) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. LYNCH v. LYNCH 164 Ariz. 127 (1990) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. LOWE v. QUINN 27 N.Y.2d 397, 267 N.E.2d (N.Y. 1971) Case Brief.
Chapter 20: Civil Liberties: Protecting Individual Rights Section 3.
Rights of Criminal Defendants Are the due process rights and the procedural guarantees provided by the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. PEOPLE v. MITCHELL 58 N.Y.2d 368, 448 N.E.2d 121 (1983) Case Brief.
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey All rights reserved. Introduction to the American Legal System By Enika.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. STAFFORD 223 Kan. 62, 573 P.2d 970 (Kan. 1977) Case Brief.
Criminal Justice Process: The Investigation Mrs. Gurzler.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. UNITED STATES v. JEWELL 532 F.2d 697 (2d Cir. 1976) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. GRAY Juvenile Court of Ohio, Cuyahoga County. 145 N.E.2d 162 (1957) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. MINNEAPOLIS STAR & TRIBUNE v. LEE 353 N.W.2d 213 (Minn.Ct.App. 1984) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. NEWMAN v. SUMMY CO. 133 F.2d 465 (2d Cir. 1943) Case Brief.
How have the decisions of the Supreme Court protected people accused of crimes? What rights are accused people guaranteed? Landmark Supreme Court Cases.
The Bill of Rights and the Criminal Trial Process.
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study of Evidence The primary purpose of the rules of evidence is to help ensure a fair trial. Copyright © 2015 Carolina.
Criminal Trial Rights Tanner Powell and Eric Tate.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BUSBY v. STATE 894 So.2d 88 (Fla. 2004) Case Brief.
Due Process of the Law Requires the state and the federal government in matters of life, liberty, or property of individuals to be reasonable, fair, and.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. WILLIAMS Supreme Court of Iowa 695 N.W.2d 23 (2005) Case Brief.
Chapter 20: Civil Liberties: Protecting Individual Rights Section 3.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STUMP v. SPARKMAN 435 U.S. 349 (1978) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. OREGON STATE BAR v. SMITH 149 Or.App. 171, 942 P.2d 793 (1997) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. FINE v. DELALANDE, INC. 545 F.Supp. 275 (S.D.N.Y. 1982) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. RIEMERS v. GRAND FORKS HERALD 688 N.W.2d 167 (N.D. 2004) Case Brief.
Attorney/Judge. The purpose of opening statements by each side is to tell jurors something about the case they will be hearing. The opening statements.
TUTORIAL #3 FIFTH AMENDMENT &CONFESSIONS. RIGHT NOT TO BE WITNESS AGAINST SELF Cannot be compelled to testify Cannot be compelled to testify At trial.
Due Process of Law WJIS Mrs. Bryant’s 5 th Grade Social Studies.
5th amendment By: Evany Flores 9.5.
STATE v. WINDER 348 N.Y.S.2d 270 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1973)
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
CHAPTER 2 HISTORY CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND THE SUPREME COURT
The Bill of Rights and the Criminal Trial Process
WJES Mrs. Bryant’s 5th Grade Social Studies
BROWN v. BROWN 300 So. 2d 719 (Fla. DCA 1974)
Criminal Procedure: Theory and Practice, 2d.
STATE v. KINGMAN 463 P.2d 638 (Wash. 1970)
The Bill of Rights and the Criminal Trial Process
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
ARENA LAND & INV. CO., INC. v. PETTY 69 F.3d 547 (10th Cir. 1995)
It’s a murder trial. Get ready.
PEOPLE v. ALEXANDER 53 Ill.App.2d 299, 202 N.E.2d 841 (1964)
Chapter 4 Case Law and Case Briefing
Presentation transcript:

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GRIFFIN v. CALIFORNIA 380 U.S. 609 (1965) Case Brief

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GRIFFIN v. CALIFORNIA PURPOSE: Case illustrates privilege against self-incrimination.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GRIFFIN v. CALIFORNIA CAUSE OF ACTION: First-degree murder.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GRIFFIN v. CALIFORNIA FACTS: Griffin was tried for murder, but refused to take the witness stand. Judge instructed jury: “... the jury may take that failure [to testify] into consideration as tending to indicate the truth of such evidence and as indicating that among the inferences that may be reasonably drawn therefrom those unfavorable to the defendant are the more probable....” The prosecutor also commented extensively on defendant’s refusal to testify.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GRIFFIN v. CALIFORNIA ISSUE: Whether the comment on defendant’s refusal to testify, approved by rule in California, violates the Fifth Amendment as applied to the state through the Fourteenth Amendment.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GRIFFIN v. CALIFORNIA HOLDING: Yes, it violates the Fifth Amendment. Reversed.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GRIFFIN v. CALIFORNIA REASONING: What the jury may infer, given no help from the court, is one thing. What it may infer when the court solemnizes the silence of the accused into evidence against him is quite another. The right against self-incrimination of the Fifth Amendment is zealously guarded.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GRIFFIN v. CALIFORNIA DISSENT: The issue should be whether the defendant was “compelled” to testify against himself, which he was not.

Feedback: Privacy Policy Feedback
Do Not Sell My Personal Information
About project: SlidePlayer Terms of Service

© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc. All rights reserved.