Difference between revisions of "Holmes v. South Carolina"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
m
Line 1: Line 1:
In '''''Holmes v. South''' Carolina'', 547 U.S. 319 (2006), Justice [[Sam Alito]] wrote for a unanimous [[U.S. Supreme Court]] that application of the [[Gregory rule]] by South Carolina to exclude evidence submitted by a criminal [[defendant]] about potential guilt by a third party violates a criminal [[defendant]]'s right to have "'a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.'"<ref>''Crane'', 476 U.S. at 690 (quoting  Trombetta, 467 U.S. at 485).</ref>
+
In '''''Holmes v. South Carolina''''', 547 U.S. 319 (2006), Justice [[Sam Alito]] wrote for a unanimous [[U.S. Supreme Court]] that application of the [[Gregory rule]] by South Carolina to exclude evidence submitted by a criminal [[defendant]] about potential guilt by a third party violates a criminal [[defendant]]'s right to have "'a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.'"<ref>''Crane'', 476 U.S. at 690 (quoting  Trombetta, 467 U.S. at 485).</ref>
  
 
== References ==
 
== References ==

Revision as of 23:42, May 2, 2008

In Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319 (2006), Justice Sam Alito wrote for a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court that application of the Gregory rule by South Carolina to exclude evidence submitted by a criminal defendant about potential guilt by a third party violates a criminal defendant's right to have "'a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.'"[1]

References

  1. Crane, 476 U.S. at 690 (quoting Trombetta, 467 U.S. at 485).