Amendment+6

Amendment 6 In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

[|United States v. Killeaney — Sixth Amendment and the Dual Sovereignty Doctrine — A Circuit Split involving Tribal Law Enforcement & Tribal Courts? « Turtle Talk] This is about someone named Miranda who was put in tribal court in South Dakota. She had the right to a public and speedy trial, but she got someone as a lawyer who never went to law school and the one she is against is a lawyer and has graduated. She violated something in tribal lands.

[|Andrea Pia Yates and the Sixth Amendment | USNEWSLINK | © 2003] This women had five children and then drowned them in the bathtub she said the devil possessed her but she was legally found insane, she was put on death row. She was violated of her sixth amendment because the jurors were all against her because of previous shots on the news. The jury had a gag order on her which is why she was violated of her 6th amendment. She was never killed on electric chair etc….
 * Andrea Pia Yate's**


 * //__Amendment 6__//**
 * //__Case B__//**
 * //__Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 69 ('66). The Schmerber Court posed two questions: (1) whether the police were justified in imposing a nonconsensual blood test and (2) whether the procedures themselves were reasonable. Id. at 768. In answering the first question, the Court recognized that it was 'writ[ing] on a clean slate' regarding the treatment of searches that involve intrusions into the human body. Id. at 767-8. It concluded that such searches require probable cause. Id. at 770-1.__//**

December 18, 2007 People vs. Quitiquit California Evidence Code section 1370 creates an exception to the hearsay rule that permits the introduction of an unavailable witness' statement to a medical professional "made at or near the time of the infliction or threat of physical injury." In this case, appellant was charged with second degree murder and spousal abuse. The prosecution's theory was that the victim died approximately nine months after the defendant twisted her neck. The victim had started seeing doctors within a week after her purported injury but specifically denied that she had suffered any trauma to her neck until almost two months after the incident in question. It was not until almost two months later that she told a doctor that the defendant had twisted her neck nearly two months earlier.

The sixth amendment allows any person to have a speedy trial and jury of peers for any criminal case. All trial by jury’s must be open to the public through the press but not necessarily on cameras. Any defendant in the trial by jury has a right to know what they are being charged with, and lawyer is to be appointed to them if the defendant cannot provide there own. The trial must take place where the alleged crime took place. Any defendant has the right to cross-examine a witness, or subpoena a witness to testify on their own behalf. These rights are protected by the process of the fifth amendment.

Article links: http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2005/04/16/news/local/news02.txt In this article, the court case was about a man who was accused of felony assult and more. The trial took longer than expected and the 6th amendment was brought up because the man who was accused did not get a speedy trial. Other similar cases were also brought up, such a similar case in Ohio. The similar case in Ohio was reviewed and overturned due to the 6th amendment.

Video Links: http://revver.com/video/362790/reading-the-constitution-the-sixth-amendment/