"...There were two separate violations of the Sixth Amendment during Clark's trial: 1) the court should not have granted leave for Clark to represent herself; and 2) in any event, her pro se status should have been terminated when it became clear that no one would be in the courtroom to represent her interests during the presentation of the prosecution's case. Both problems constitute structural defects in Clark's trial...
"...The core of the constitutional defect is found in one snapshot from Clark's trial. During the prosecutor's opening statement and during the government's entire direct case against defendants, which spanned at least seven trial days, no one was present in the courtroom to represent Clark's interests. Clark was without assistance of counsel for her defense, in clear abrogation of her Sixth Amendment right to counsel...The proceedings at issue, with no one sitting at the defense table during the prosecution's entire case would have appeared unfair to many people with knowledge of the constitutional right to counsel or a respect for our adversarial system of justice...
"The trial judge was obligated to procure standby counsel for Clark when her inability to proceed according to court rules and protocol led to the absence of any representation at all during vital portions of her trial...
"For the reasons set forth above, Clark's petition is hereby granted and her conviction is reversed. The State must conduct a new trial within ninety days of this Order or release Clark from confinement...SO ORDERED S.D.NY 2006"
Alternative political/cultural commentary from an historical New Left working-class counter-cultural perspective.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Judy Clark's Trial & Sixth Amendment Violations
As a recent New York Times article indicated, 1981 Brink's Case defendant Judy Clark still has not apparently been released by New York State authorities. Yet before a U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit trio of judges (that then included soon-to-be-named U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor) overturned a lower federal court decision in the Clark v. Perez case in early 2008, lower federal court Judge Scheindlin had issued the following ruling on September 22, 2006:
No comments:
Post a Comment