|
Fifth Amendment
Court Cases -
The Grand Jury Clause
Each of these Fifth Amendment Court Cases is somehow significant to the way
the Supreme Court has interpreted the Grand Jury Clause in the Fifth Amendment to the
US Constitution. Well, most are significant, some are just interesting!
You
can read more about the history and meaning of the Grand Jury Clause
here.
Fifth Amendment Court Cases
Fifth Amendment Court Cases - The Grand Jury Clause -
United States vs. Moreland
You might have wondered what an "infamous" crime is. The 5th Amendment says
that people cannot be charged with an "infamous" crime, unless indicted
by a grand jury. The Supreme Court ruled in United States vs. Moreland,
1924, that an infamous crime is one in which the punishment for the
crime could be a prison sentence. In other words, an infamous crime is
committed based on the potential punishment. The actual punishment
given is not relevant. You
can read the details of the Moreland case here.
Fifth Amendment Court Cases - The Grand Jury Clause -
United States vs. Williams
|
Supreme Court
of the United States
|
Many of the procedures that cause the grand jury to be stacked against a
witness have been allowed by the Supreme Court. It has always been the
tradition that a prosecutor did not have to present all the evidence he
had to a grand jury, even if the evidence was favorable to the witness.
The Supreme Court confirmed this tradition in United States vs. Williams,
1992, when it said that,
"Because it has always been
thought sufficient for the grand jury to hear only the prosecutor's
side, and, consequently that the suspect has no right to present, and
the grand jury no obligation to consider, exculpatory evidence, it
would be incompatible with the traditional system to impose upon the
prosecutor a legal obligation to present such evidence."
Fifth Amendment Court Cases - The Grand Jury Clause -
Costello vs. United States
The Supreme Court also ruled that hearsay evidence that would not be
admissible to a trial jury, can be allowed in a grand jury. In
Costello vs. United States,
1956, the Court stated that "an
indictment returned by a legally constituted and unbiased grand
jury, ...if valid on its face, is enough to call for a trial on the
merits. The Fifth Amendment requires nothing more."
The Courts reasoning was stated as follows: "No persuasive reasons are
advanced for establishing such a rule. It would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution,
in which laymen conduct their inquiries unfettered by technical rules.
Neither justice nor the concept of a fair trial requires such a change."
Read
more about the history and meaning of the Grand Jury Clause here.
Read
more about the history and meaning of the 5th Amendment here.
Learn more about Fifth Amendment Court Cases relating to the following
Fifth Amendment clauses:
Grand
Jury Exception Clause
Double
Jeopardy Clause
The
Self-Incrimination Clause
The
Due Process Clause
Eminent
Domain Clause
Read
the Bill of Rights here.
If you would like to read about the meanings of each amendment, go to
the First
Ten Amendments page here.
Amendments:
Preamble
to the Bill of Rights
Learn
about the 1st Amendment here.
Learn
about the 2nd Amendment here.
Learn
about the 3rd Amendment here.
Learn
about the 4th Amendment here.
Learn
about the 5th Amendment here.
Learn
about the 6th Amendment here.
Learn
about the 7th Amendment here.
Learn
about the 8th Amendment here.
Learn
about the 9th Amendment here.
Learn
about the 10th Amendment here.
Like This Page?
|
New! Comments