U.S. v. Wade, 218 L. 2d 388 (87th Ct. 1967)
Type of action
A civil suit conviction in which the counsel is missing for the violation of the Sixth Amendment Right
The most important issue in this case is to obtain fair trial and judgment through civil suit. Wade is certain that the courthouse has stepped on his fifth and sixth amendment rights. He holds that he can only get justice through an appeal.Let us consider the case U.S. v. Wade, 218 L. 2d 388 (87th Ct. 1967).
Facts of the case
This case stems from a bank robbery that took place in Eustace on 21 September 1964. During the robbery, two of the bank’s employees were in and were able to recognize Wade as one of the robbers in the County Courthouse (Dimitrakopoulos, 2007, p. 331). The suspects were identified by being paraded, a method the defense considered infringement on Wade’s rights as outlined in the fifth and sixth amendments. The court appealed even though the trial court quashed the application before it was reinstated by the Fifth Circuit. The court is therefore inn court because parading of Wade for identification as one of the robbers was a violation of his sixth amendment right.
Contentions of the parties
Wade believes that the County Courthouse obtained facts about the case in a way that violated his Fifth Amendment right of self-incrimination and the sixth amendment on being paraded. According to Wad’s sixth amendment right, he was to be paraded in the presence of his counsel. However, the County Courthouse maintained that the accused was guilty of robbery following thorough investigations and submission of two eyewitnesses, who were employees of the bank.
Issues
The issue in this case revel that the Trial Court stepped on Wade’s rights by convicting him of robbery based on facts from eyewitnesses and through lineups in the absence of his counsel (Dimitrakopoulos, 2007, p. 333). On the other hand, the defense’s position that Wade’s Fifth Amendment was violated is untrue. The prosecution compiled evidence gathered through meticulous investigations to ascertain that Wade was one of the robbers.
Decision
The Chief Justice and the Justice at the Fifth Circuit held that based on the submissions by the defense on Fifth Amendment; there was no violation of Wade’s rights under the Fifth Amendment. The judges ruled that the previous decision by the court lacked proof. However, they ruled that the judged were required to observe the Sixth Amendment, as this amounted to violation of the convict’s rights. Parading of Wade was to be done in the presence of a counsel as it formed a core element of the prosecution.
Reasoning
Based on these circumstances, the absence of a counsel when the accused was paraded presented the risk of prejudice on the defense. Additionally, the defendant lacked an interactive session with the police during cross-examination.
Rule of law
It is clear that that County Courthouse violated Wade’s Sixth Amendment Rights, leading to a reversal of the previous ruling by the court. Nonetheless, because of the submissions made and evidence presented, the court could uphold the conviction of Wade as the bank robber (Dimitrakopoulos, 2007, p. 339). The case clearly defines the rule of law, which you have to follow to the latter. Every suspect has the right to a fair and just system, regardless of the court proceeding. Infringing on a suspect’s rights may put doubts on the court’s final judgment.\
Get more information at essaysexperts.net
