NCJ Number
96494
Journal
Criminal Justice Journal Volume: 7 Issue: 1 Dated: (Fall 1983) Pages: 97-129
Date Published
1983
Length
33 pages
Annotation
The decisions in the cases of Via v. Cliff, Weatherford v. Bursey, Chapman v. California, United States v. Morrison, and Rushen v. Spain illustrate intrusions upon an accused person's sixth amendment right to counsel and the standards by which the judiciary establishes a remedy for these intrusions.
Abstract
These cases represent attempts to balance the rights of the accused and society's interest in the administration of justice. The Via decision looked at the purpose of an intrusion on the right to counsel to determine sixth amendment violations. The Weatherford decision provided the presence of tainted evidence and disclosure of defense strategy as additional criteria on which such determination could be made. The Chapman case established the harmless error doctrine, while Morrison focused on the remedies for sixth amendment violations. Morrison held that in the absence of demonstrable prejudice, an intrusion on the right to counsel required no remedy and was therefore harmless under Chapman. Rushen further demonstrated the soundness and workability of the Chapman decision, showing that some violations of the right to counsel are without remedy. The U.S. Supreme Court does not regard the deterrence rationale as appropriate or sufficient to support a remedy in the absence of prejudice. A discussion of the historical development of the right to counsel and the attorney-client privilege and 175 footnotes are included.