CAMP

v.

ARKANSAS

Citator

Cited By

• Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501 (U.S. 1976)
  …rocess right to be convicted only if the State proves every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, since there has not been any state “compulsion”? Cf., e. g., Mullaney v. Wilbur, 421 U. S. 684 (1975). See also, e. g., Camp v. Arkansas, 404 U. S. 69 (1971). Such possibilities are legion, for this Court has often recognized constitutional rights even though the accused did not explicitly demand them during his trial. Thus, whether the Court’s decision is read as importing the privilege agains…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Francis v. Henderson, 425 U.S. 536 (U.S. 1976)
  …corpus relief is nonetheless available to litigate the defendant’s constitutional claims unless there has been a deliberate bypass of the state procedures.” Ibid. (emphasis supplied); 372 U. S., at 428-434,438-439. See also, e. g., Camp v. Arkansas, 404 U. S. 69 (1971). Fay acknowledged that “orderly criminal procedure is a desideratum, and of course there must be sanctions for the flouting of such procedure. But that state interest 'competes . . . against an ideal . . . [the] ideal of fair procedure.’ ”…
• Davis v. United States, 411 U.S. 233 (U.S. 1973)
  …o make a motion to suppress or to object to a prosecutor’s comments on a defendant’s failure to testify, both decisions to which this Court has applied the traditional test of waiver. Kaufman v. United States, 394 U. S. 217 (1969); Camp v. Arkansas, 404 U. S. 69 (1971). Since nothing distinguishes this ease from others involving, for example, claims of illegal searches, Kaufman v. United States, supra, in terms of the governmental interest in finality in criminal litigation, I do not discuss that interest…

Authorities Cited

• Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609 (U.S. 1965)
• Henry v. Mississippi, 379 U.S. 443 (U.S. 1965)