Is the exclusion of defense evidence a deprivation of due process?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Bessette, D069633 (Cal. App. 2017):
examination violated rights to confrontation, due process, and a fair trial rejected]; People v. Cunningham (2001) 25 Cal.4th 926, 999 [exclusion of defense evidence on a subsidiary point is not a deprivation of due process].)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Does the exclusion of defense evidence on a minor or subsidiary point impair an accused's due process right to present a defense? (California, United States of America)
Does exclusion of defense evidence on a minor or subsidiary point interfere with an accused's right to due process law? (California, United States of America)
Does the exclusion of a single item of marginally relevant evidence under California Evidence Code section 352 preclude a defendant from presenting his "consensual sexual relationship" defense? (California, United States of America)
Does the exclusion of evidence intended to establish an accused's defense on a minor or subsidiary point interfere with that accused's right to due process law? (California, United States of America)
Does exclusion of crucial defense evidence constitute a denial of due process? (California, United States of America)
Does the exclusion of irrelevant evidence deprive defendant of his right to present a defense? (California, United States of America)
Can the prosecution in a criminal case compel the defense to accept a stipulation that would deprive the state of its ability to present persuasive and forceful defense evidence? (California, United States of America)
Does the exclusion of evidence intended to establish a defense in a sexual assault case interfere with the accused's right to due process? (California, United States of America)
Is exclusion of evidence intended to avoid prejudice or damage to a defense that naturally flows from relevant, highly probative evidence? (California, United States of America)
Is exclusion of evidence designed to avoid prejudice or damage to a defense that naturally flows from relevant, highly probative evidence? (California, United States of America)
