Search for: ""In re Winship" OR "397 U.S. 358""
Results 1 - 18 of 18
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Mar 2012, 2:46 am by Rumpole
I view the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case as bottomed on a fundamental value determination of our society that it is far worse to convict an innocent man than to let a guilty man go free.In Re: Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 327 (1970),  J. [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 12:06 pm by Jon Sands
New York, 422 U.S. 853 (1975), and In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970). [read post]
9 Oct 2008, 6:19 pm
  The first issue was whether "the trial judge's instruction to the jury that the prosecution 'does not have the burden of proving that no one else may have committed the murder' [was] an error that was contrary to clearly established Supreme Court precedent as stated in In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970). [read post]
16 Mar 2015, 1:53 pm by Jon Sands
(His pro se filings in state court cited neither In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970), nor Jackson.) [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 7:46 pm
In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 372, 90 S.Ct. 1068, 1077, 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970) (Harlan, J., concurring). [read post]
21 May 2009, 5:38 pm
See In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970). [read post]
5 Feb 2014, 7:13 am
Virginia, supra; In re Winship397 U.S.358 (1970). . . . [read post]
21 Nov 2016, 9:14 am by David Post
” And indeed, the Supreme Court has held (see Coffin v U.S., 156 U.S. 432 (1895)  and In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970) ) that both parts of that formulation — that there is a “presumption of innocence” and that it can only be overcome by proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” — are incorporated into the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment, applicable to state proceedings through the… [read post]
9 Aug 2007, 12:39 am
The court also cited In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 368 (1970), in observing that the safeguards that are required for juvenile offenses-the right to notice, the right to counsel, the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, the privilege against self-incrimination, and proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt-"are more than sufficient to ensure the reliability that Apprendi requires. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 7:35 am
’” Id. at 230 (quoting In Re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970)). [read post]
7 Oct 2009, 12:00 am
Williams, 425 U.S. 501 (1976); In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970); 9 J. [read post]
6 May 2012, 11:52 am by Schachtman
United States, 383 U.S. 406,416 (1966)(“the purpose of a trial is to determine the truth”); id. at 7 (citing In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 368, 370 (1970) (Harlan, J. concurring)(the standard of proof is meant to “instruct the factfinder concerning the degree of confidence our society thinks he should have in the correctness of factual conclusions for a particular type of adjudication.) [read post]