Right to Impartial Judge: Difference between revisions
From Criminal Defense Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Created page with '=Background= The judge holds enormous power in both civil law and common law criminal justice systems. Because this power is disproportionately large compared to both the crimina�' |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
In Tumey v. Ohio, the Supreme Court described the reasons why it is important for judges to be impartial: | In Tumey v. Ohio, the Supreme Court described the reasons why it is important for judges to be impartial: | ||
<blockquote>[I]t certainly violates the Fourteenth Amendment and deprives a defendant in a criminal case of due process of law to subject his liberty or property to th ejudgment of a court, the judge of which has a direct personal, substantial pecuniary interest in reaching a conclusion against him in his case"<Ref> Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927)</blockquote> | <blockquote>[I]t certainly violates the Fourteenth Amendment and deprives a defendant in a criminal case of due process of law to subject his liberty or property to th ejudgment of a court, the judge of which has a direct personal, substantial pecuniary interest in reaching a conclusion against him in his case"<Ref> Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927)</ref></blockquote> | ||
---- | ---- | ||
See [[Rights of the Accused]] | See [[Rights of the Accused]] | ||
=Notes= | =Notes= | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
Revision as of 09:03, 11 August 2010
Background
The judge holds enormous power in both civil law and common law criminal justice systems. Because this power is disproportionately large compared to both the criminal defense lawyer and the prosecutor, a defendant has the right to trial by an impartial and unbiased judge.
United States
In Tumey v. Ohio, the Supreme Court described the reasons why it is important for judges to be impartial:
[I]t certainly violates the Fourteenth Amendment and deprives a defendant in a criminal case of due process of law to subject his liberty or property to th ejudgment of a court, the judge of which has a direct personal, substantial pecuniary interest in reaching a conclusion against him in his case"[1]
Notes
- ↑ Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927)
