NCJ Number
31181
Journal
University of Colorado Law Review Volume: 47 Issue: 1 Dated: (FALL 1975) Pages: 1-71
Date Published
1975
Length
71 pages
Annotation
IN ANALYZING SIGNIFICANTLY RELEVANT SUPREME COURT DECISIONS, THIS ARTICLE ARGUES THAT THE COURT HAS ABANDONNED DESIRABLE CONCEPTS OF WAIVER IN GUILTY PLEA CASES AND GIVEN UNJUSTIFIED WEIGHT TO COUNSEL PRESENCE.
Abstract
THE ARTICLE ANALYZES THE SUPREME COURT'S GUILTY-PLEA TRILOGY (BRADY V. UNITED STATES, MCMANN V. RICHARDSON, AND PARKER V. NORTH CAROLINA) AS WELL AS A NUMBER OF SUBSEQUENT SUPREME COURT DECISIONS (INCLUDING TOLLETT V. HENDERSON, ROBINSON V. NEIL, BLACKLEDGE V. PERRY, ELLIS V. DYSON, AND LEFKOWITZ V. NEWSOME). A SECTION ON 'THE MERITS AND DEMERITS OF THE KNOWING WAIVER CONCEPT' EXPLORES PROBLEMS OF FINALITY AND HABEAS CORPUS JURISDICTION. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER A GUILTY PLEA SHOULD BE HELD INVOLUNTARY ONLY WHEN INDUCED BY A THREAT OF UNLAWFUL ACTION, THE ARTICLE EXAMINES THE HISTORY OF THE DOCTRINS OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL CONDITIONS, THE DOCTRINE OF DURESS IN PRIVATE CONTRACT CASES, THE LAW OF VOLUNTARINESS APPLICABLE TO OUT-OF-COURT CONFESSIONS, AND THE SUPREME COURT'S TREATMENT OF NON-GUILTY-PLEA WAIVERS OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. AMONG THE OTHER TOPICS CONSIDERED ARE RETROACTIVITY IN CONSTITUTIONAL ADJUDICATION AND THE REQUIREMENT OF THE EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)