NCJ Number
140780
Journal
Criminal Justice Journal Volume: 14 Issue: 2 Dated: (Fall 1992) Pages: 451- 460
Date Published
1992
Length
10 pages
Annotation
In its 1990 decision in Michigan v. Harvey, the U.S. Supreme Court has limited the rights of the accused by allowing evidence obtained in violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel to be admitted to impeach a defendant's testimony.
Abstract
In 1964, in Massiah v. United States, the Court had excluded a defendant's incriminating statements deliberately elicited by an informant while the indicted defendant was out on bail. In contrast, in the Harvey case, the defendant's statement made without his attorney was allowed for impeachment purposes. Thus, the Supreme Court is content to determine the nature and effect of a constitutional right based on its characterization as a prophylactic rule or procedural safeguard. However, in California, courts in two recent cases have held that basic Sixth Amendment rights may yet be absolute. This approach is more appropriate, because the determining factor should be whether the suspect's statement was voluntary, as it is in the context of Fifth Amendment violations. Footnotes