Sunday, March 25, 2012

Adamson v. California case brief

Adamson v. California (1947)
Facts: Adamson convicted of first degree murder. CA allowed the prosecutor and the judge to comment and to allow the jury to take into account if the D failed to take into account the evidence.
  1. Issues: D doesn’t have to take the stand according to the 5th Amendment. The prosecutor cannot call the
Holding: Court says that 5th Amendment is not made effective by the 14th Amendment. Court also says that all of the Bill of Rights are not extended to the 14th Amendment. Says that there is neither total or selective incorporation. The court concedes that if this was a federal provision, this would violate the 5th A. But even assuming as such, this does not mean that it violates the 14th A.
*This case has the best argument for the total incorporation view. Black in its dissent argues that the B of R should be incorporated through the 14th A.

California, unlike many other jurisdictions, allows limited comment on a D’s refusal to testify. Court says that “It seems quite natural that when a defendant has opportunity to deny or explain fact and determines not to do so, the prosecution should bring out the strength of the evidence by commenting upon defendant’s failure to explain or deny it.”

Black’s dissent says that the 14th Amendment explicitly guarantees that the Bill of Rights should also be applied to the states, and therefore that the protection given to the 5th Amendment against compelled testimony should be applied to the state.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Exploring Career Paths: What Can You Do with a Juris Doctor Degree?

Earning a Juris Doctor (JD) degree is a significant accomplishment, opening a wide array of career paths beyond the traditional legal practi...