NCJ Number
32937
Journal
Michigan Law Review Volume: 74 Issue: 2 Dated: (DECEMBER 1975) Pages: 192-306
Date Published
1975
Length
115 pages
Annotation
THIS ARTICLE ADDRESSES A SERIES OF QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO PRODUCE, AND THUS IMPLICITLY TO PRESENT, ANY WITNESS CAPABLE OF GIVING TESTIMONY IN HIS FAVOR.
Abstract
IT RE-EXAMINES THE BASES FOR DOCTRINAIRE ASSERTIONS THAT THE COMPULSORY PROCESS CLAUSE, HAVING NOTHING TO SAY ABOUT STANDARDS OF COMPETENCE FOR DEFENSE WITNESSES, HAS NO BEARING ON THE POWER OF THE STATE TO IMPOSE NUMERICAL LIMITS ON THE NUMBER OF DEFENSE SUBPOENAS, TO DENY SUBPOENAS FOR WITNESSES WHOSE TESTIMONY IS DEEMED CUMULATIVE, TO DENY A DEFENDANT CONTINUANCES PENDING THE APPEARANCE OF HIS WITNESSES, AND TO REQUIRE A DEFENDANT TO ACCEPT SUBSTITUTE EVIDENCE IN THE PLACE OF LIVE TESTIMONY, IT FURTHER ANALYZES ASSERTIONS THAT THE CLAUSE, GUARANTEEING THE DEFENDANT NOTHING MORE THAN EQUALITY WITH THE PROSECUTION REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENAS, HAS NO ADDITIONAL BEARING ON THE POWER OF THE STATE TO WITHHOLD SUBPOENAS FROM DEFENDANTS WHO ARE UNABLE TO PAY FOR THEM, TO REFUSE TO ENFORCE SUBPOENAS BY ATTACHMENT OR ARREST, AND TO REFUSE TO PRODUCE OUT-OFSTATE WITNESSES FROM BEYOND ITS TERRITORIAL BOUNDARIES. PART I OF THE ARTICLE DEFINES THE CONSTITUTIONAL STANDARDS THAT GOVERNS THE SIMPLE CASE OF A NONINDIGENT DEFENDANT WHO MAKES A TIMELY APPLICATION TO PRODUCE A WITNESS FROM WITHIN THE TERRITORY OF THE JURISDICTION. PARTS II THROUGH IV, IN TURN, EXAMINE THAT STANDARD IN THE LIGHT OF COMPLICATING FACTORS SUCH AS THE DEFENDANT'S NEED FOR MORE TIME TO SECURE A WITNESS' PRESENCE, THE INDIGENCY OF THE DEFENDANT, THE DEFENDANT'S FAILURE TO MAKE AN ADVANCE SHOWING OF NEED FOR THE WITNESS, THE LOCATION OF THE WITNESS BEYOND THE TERRITORIAL BOUNDARIES OF THE JURISDICTION, AND THE AVAILABILITY OF THE DEFENDANT'S EVIDENCE IN A FORM OTHER THAN LIVE TESTIMONY. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)