NCJ Number
35267
Journal
NOTRE DAME LAWYER Volume: 51 Issue: 4 Dated: (APRIL 1976) Pages: 833-848
Date Published
1976
Length
16 pages
Annotation
EXAMINATION OF THE DEFENDANT'S ARGUMENT IN NORTH V RUSSEL (1975) THAT DUE PROCESS REQUIRES THE STATES TO AFFORD THE DEFENDANT A LAWYER JUDGE IN MISDEMEANOR CASES PUNISHABLE BY IMPRISONMENT.
Abstract
AN OVERVIEW OF BRITISH AND AMERICAN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES REGARDING DUE PROCESS AND THE RIGHT TO A LAWYER JUDGE IS UNDERTAKEN. THE THREE DIFFERING VIEWS ADOPTED BY STATE SUPREME COURTS IN CROUCH V JUSTICE OF THE PEACE COURT OF THE SIXTH PRECINCT (1968), GORDON V JUSTICE COURT FOR YUBA JD OF SUTTER COUNTY (1974), AND DITTY V HAMPTON (1973) ARE EXAMINED, AND CASE LAW ON THE RELATED RIGHT TO COUNSEL ISSUE ARE SURVEYED. THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES THAT THE STATE MUST ENSURE THAT THE DUE PROCESS STANDARD IS MAINTAINED.