NCJ Number
69045
Journal
William and Mary Law Review Volume: 20 Issue: 4 Dated: (SUMMER 1979) Pages: 655-739
Date Published
1979
Length
85 pages
Annotation
CONFLICTS ARISING FROM THE ATTEMPT TO BALANCE THE RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS WITH THE RIGHTS OF THE PUBLIC ARE DISCUSSED THROUGH CASE ANALYSIS; SELF-INCRIMINATION, COUNSEL, THE PRESS, AND PUNISHMENT ARE ADDRESSED.
Abstract
THE COURTS TRADITIONALLY HAVE LABORED TO ADMINISTER CRIMINAL LAW IN ORDER TO PRESERVE A PROPER BALANCE BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND SOCIAL WELFARE. WITH THE WARREN COURT CAME THE 'DUE PROCESS' REVOLUTION, DURING WHICH TIME SOME STEADFAST RULES WERE DEVELOPED TO EFFECT THE SPECIFIC PROMISES OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIMINALLY ACCUSED. 'MIRANDA V. ARIZONA' (1966), WHICH FOCUSES ON THE FIFTH AMENDMENT PROTECTION AGAINST SELF INCRIMINATION, IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE TREND. WHILE THE COURT DID NOT INTEND TO BAR ALL CUSTODIAL INTERROGATION IN 'MIRANDA,' IT DID INTEND TO CREATE A STRICTER STANDARD FOR THE ADMISSION OF CONFESSIONS. IN SUBSEQUENT DECISIONS THE COURT FELL SHORT OF THIS GOAL. FAIR TRIAL AND FREE PRESS CONSIDERATIONS WERE ADDRESSED BY THE COURT IN THE 1966 DECISION IN 'SHEPPARD V. MAXWELL.' IN THIS CASE THE COURT SANCTIONED DIRECT RESTRAINTS ON TRIAL PARTICIPANTS, STATE OFFICIALS, AND NEWSMEN. THE CRIMINAL DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO LEGAL COUNSEL WAS JUDGED INDIPENSABLE IN THE 1963 SUPREME COURT DECISION IN 'GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT.' FINALLY, SOME JUDICIAL INTERPRETATIONS OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT HAVE EXPANDED THE SCOPE OF PRISONERS' RIGHTS TO INCLUDE ADEQUATE MEDICAL CARE. HOWEVER, IT IS SUGGESTED HEREIN THAT WHAT BEGAN WITH THE WARREN COURT AS A VINDICATION OF THE SPECIFIC PLEDGE OF THE AMENDMENTS HAS CONVERTED BEHIND A LAW AND ORDER BACKLASH TO A CIRCUMSTANCES-ORIENTED SYSTEM OF MANDATORY BALANCING OF PRIVATE RIGHTS AND PUBLIC INTERESTS. DECISIONS FOLLOWING THE LANDMARK CASES OF THE 1960'S TEND TO REFLECT MORE SOCIAL POLICY THAN ELEMENTAL JUSTICE FOR THE INDIVIDUAL. FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED.