Thursday, September 6, 2012

Bruton v. US case brief


  1. Bruton v. US (US 1968) (p.190)

    1. E and B on trial for robbing a postal facility; E had made a statement, “B and I did it” – an admission which govt can use to prove E’s guilt; judge decided to admit statement with limiting instruction that it wasn’t to be considered as to B’s guilt
      • B’s arg: limiting instruction isn’t enough – can’t trust jury in this situation
    2. holding: confrontation clause is offended by this evidence, should have been excluded
    3. other alternatives available to govt
      • redact statement, to get rid of all reference to B’s involvement
      • give up using the statement altogether
      • have two separate trials, one for B and one for E
      • have one trial with two juries (more efficient) – Δ-specific evidence will be heard by jury for that particular Δ.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Montana Cannabis Industry Association v. Montana Case Brief: Key Takeaways for Law Students and Legal Researchers

Case Brief: Montana Cannabis Industry Association v. Montana, 368 P.3d 1131 (Mont. 2016) Court Supreme Court of Montana Citation 368 P.3d 11...