|
|
| Inmate Should Not Receive New Trial |
| By Associated Press |
| Published: 11/14/2005 |
|
The Supreme Court reversed an appeals court ruling, in the case of Kane v. Espitia, that a convicted California carjacker who was given scant access to a prison law library should receive a new trial. The decision overturns the ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco that Garcia Espitia, who acted as his own lawyer, was denied his constitutional right to visit the library. Espitia's argument that he was entitled to library access under the Sixth Amendment right to self representation was denied by lower courts. But the 9th Circuit reversed those decisions, ruling that "the lack of any pretrial access to law books violated Espitia's constitutional right to represent himself ... " In overturning the case, the Supreme Court said there weren't guidelines as to whether inmates can access law libraries in the 1975 Faretta v. California decision, which said inmates could represent themselves. The ruling "says nothing about any specific legal aid that the State owes a pro se criminal defendant," the court wrote. Espitia filed "repeated requests and court orders" challenging his lack of access to the library and received only about four hours of visits, according to the two-page ruling. The case was sent back to the 9th Circuit for review. |
MARKETPLACE search vendors | advanced search
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
|
Comments:
No comments have been posted for this article.
Login to let us know what you think