Webb v. Texas case brief summary
409 U.S. 95 (1972)
CASE FACTS
After the prosecution had rested its case in defendant's burglary trial, the jury was temporarily excused. Defendant called his only witness, who was then serving a prison sentence, during the recess. The trial judge, on his own initiative, admonished the witness in great detail as to what would happen if he lied under oath. Defendant's attorney objected, pointing out that the State's witnesses had not been so admonished and contending that the trial judge had exerted on the mind of the witness such duress that the witness could not freely and voluntarily decide whether or not to testify, thereby depriving defendant of his defense and of due process of law by coercing the only defense witness into refusing to testify. In affirming, the criminal appellate court rejected defense counsel's contentions but did state that it did not condone the manner of admonition.
DISCUSSION
On certiorari, the Court disagreed and held that the trial judge's threatening remarks, directed only at the single witness for the defense, effectively drove that witness off the stand, which deprived defendant of due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment.
CONCLUSION
The Court reversed defendant's conviction.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
409 U.S. 95 (1972)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant filed a petition for writ of
certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, which affirmed
his conviction in the district court for burglary.CASE FACTS
After the prosecution had rested its case in defendant's burglary trial, the jury was temporarily excused. Defendant called his only witness, who was then serving a prison sentence, during the recess. The trial judge, on his own initiative, admonished the witness in great detail as to what would happen if he lied under oath. Defendant's attorney objected, pointing out that the State's witnesses had not been so admonished and contending that the trial judge had exerted on the mind of the witness such duress that the witness could not freely and voluntarily decide whether or not to testify, thereby depriving defendant of his defense and of due process of law by coercing the only defense witness into refusing to testify. In affirming, the criminal appellate court rejected defense counsel's contentions but did state that it did not condone the manner of admonition.
DISCUSSION
On certiorari, the Court disagreed and held that the trial judge's threatening remarks, directed only at the single witness for the defense, effectively drove that witness off the stand, which deprived defendant of due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment.
CONCLUSION
The Court reversed defendant's conviction.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment