对法律不熟悉不熟悉,求高人指教 (转载)# WaterWorld - 未名水世界
g*k
1 楼
【 以下文字转载自 Law 讨论区 】
发信人: genexk (genexk), 信区: Law
标 题: 对法律不熟悉不熟悉,求高人指教
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sun Apr 3 22:10:13 2011, 美东)
Commonwealth v. Kenneth Waters
399 Mass. 708
Waters was arrested and charged with murder and robbery, tried and
convicted of both crimes. Evidence was based on crime scene photos, a
knife retrieved from trash, and witness statements.
Main focus is on Kenneth Waters’ appeal in court
Waters appealed charging that the trial judge committed 4 reversible
errors: voir dire, jury instructions, admission of evidence, and
denial of defense motions.
引用Lexis Nexis里的一段:
“The defendant argues that the judge erred in failing to instruct the
jury that intoxication may render a statement involuntary. The
defendant did not object to the judge's instructions, nor did he
request further instructions on this issue. Therefore, the standard of
review is whether the jury charge [*715] was so erroneous that it
created a 'substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice.’ ”
其他background info: Waters admitted to two former girlfriends Marsh
and Perry several weeks after murder incident occurred, Waters was
drunk, and stated that he had killed the “ …(referring to the victim)”
嫌看得太麻烦的:故事基本就是被告在喝醉后曾向女友承认杀了被害人,在女友证词和
各种证据
后,被判谋杀罪名成立,提起上诉,其中一项如下
Q: The judge failed to instruct the jury properly on voluntariness
A. What is the law on this issue?
B. Is it state law or federal?
C. What was the ruling of the court?
D. What was the reason given by the court for this ruling?
E. What case law (if any) did the court cite?
可能理解能力有限,对jury instruction 的A和B不清楚
不知道问题里的 “law on this issue” 是要解释law on voluntariness 还是on
failure to instruct jury。因为在voir dire里已经可以很清楚地解释
voluntariness, 不管是due process of the fifth还是commonwealth v. allen的
case law都不在考虑范围内。Due process要求有police involvement and
coercion, case law发生在这个案件之后而且不是retroactive.
如果是问law on failing to instruct jury,由于审理时被告没有提出反对,是不是
要针
对plain error standard of review来解释呢?还是具体解释substantial risk of
a miscarriage of justice?对这个不熟悉,求高人指教
发信人: genexk (genexk), 信区: Law
标 题: 对法律不熟悉不熟悉,求高人指教
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sun Apr 3 22:10:13 2011, 美东)
Commonwealth v. Kenneth Waters
399 Mass. 708
Waters was arrested and charged with murder and robbery, tried and
convicted of both crimes. Evidence was based on crime scene photos, a
knife retrieved from trash, and witness statements.
Main focus is on Kenneth Waters’ appeal in court
Waters appealed charging that the trial judge committed 4 reversible
errors: voir dire, jury instructions, admission of evidence, and
denial of defense motions.
引用Lexis Nexis里的一段:
“The defendant argues that the judge erred in failing to instruct the
jury that intoxication may render a statement involuntary. The
defendant did not object to the judge's instructions, nor did he
request further instructions on this issue. Therefore, the standard of
review is whether the jury charge [*715] was so erroneous that it
created a 'substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice.’ ”
其他background info: Waters admitted to two former girlfriends Marsh
and Perry several weeks after murder incident occurred, Waters was
drunk, and stated that he had killed the “ …(referring to the victim)”
嫌看得太麻烦的:故事基本就是被告在喝醉后曾向女友承认杀了被害人,在女友证词和
各种证据
后,被判谋杀罪名成立,提起上诉,其中一项如下
Q: The judge failed to instruct the jury properly on voluntariness
A. What is the law on this issue?
B. Is it state law or federal?
C. What was the ruling of the court?
D. What was the reason given by the court for this ruling?
E. What case law (if any) did the court cite?
可能理解能力有限,对jury instruction 的A和B不清楚
不知道问题里的 “law on this issue” 是要解释law on voluntariness 还是on
failure to instruct jury。因为在voir dire里已经可以很清楚地解释
voluntariness, 不管是due process of the fifth还是commonwealth v. allen的
case law都不在考虑范围内。Due process要求有police involvement and
coercion, case law发生在这个案件之后而且不是retroactive.
如果是问law on failing to instruct jury,由于审理时被告没有提出反对,是不是
要针
对plain error standard of review来解释呢?还是具体解释substantial risk of
a miscarriage of justice?对这个不熟悉,求高人指教