The Right to a Jury Trial and Access to Evidence
The Supreme Court in Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968), held that the right to a jury trial is a fundamental right incorporated to the States through the 14th Amendment, emphasizing the necessary protections it affords the accused. However, in District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne, 557 U.S. 52 (2009), the Court held that an accused does not have a due process right under the United States Constitution to obtain evidence to conduct DNA testing to prove actual innocence.
a. In your own words, explain whether the above statements about the rulings in Duncan and Osborne fully and accurately capture what the Supreme Court decided. Consider the core reasoning behind these rulings in your explanation.
b. Given that the Due Process Clause is intended to protect the rights of the accused, how should public policy address the balance between these rights and the limitations imposed by the Osborne decision? Should policy reforms be considered to ensure greater access to evidence like DNA testing, and if so, how?
Sample solution
Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell.
In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.
God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.
Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.
To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.
References
Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.
Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.
Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.
Sample Answer
Sample Answer
The Right to a Jury Trial and Access to Evidence
a. Explanation of Supreme Court Rulings in Duncan and Osborne
The statements regarding the rulings in Duncan v. Louisiana and District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne provide a general overview of the Supreme Court’s decisions, but they could be elaborated upon for clarity and depth.
In Duncan v. Louisiana, the Supreme Court indeed held that the right to a jury trial is fundamental and applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. The core reasoning behind this ruling emphasized that the jury trial is an essential safeguard against arbitrary government action. The Court recognized that jury trials provide a check on the powers of the state, ensuring that citizens are judged by their peers and that the legal process remains grounded in community standards. This decision was significant as it incorporated the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial against the states, thereby enhancing the protections afforded to defendants in criminal cases.
Conversely, in District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne, the ruling took a different direction regarding access to evidence necessary for proving actual innocence. The Supreme Court determined that there is no explicit constitutional right under the Due Process Clause to obtain evidence, such as DNA testing, after conviction to establish innocence. The reasoning behind this decision was rooted in the principle that due process does not extend to providing post-conviction access to evidence unless state law grants such a right. The Court indicated that while access to evidence is important, it is ultimately up to the states to establish their own procedures for handling post-conviction claims of innocence.
In summary, while Duncan v. Louisiana underscored the fundamental nature of the right to a jury trial as a protection for the accused, Osborne v. District Attorney’s Office limited access to potentially exonerating evidence, highlighting a distinct boundary between trial rights and post-conviction procedures.
b. Public Policy Considerations and Potential Reforms
Given that the Due Process Clause aims to protect the rights of the accused, public policy must find a way to balance these rights with the limitations imposed by the Osborne decision. This involves recognizing that while courts have discretion over procedural matters, access to evidence is critical for ensuring justice and fairness in the legal system.
Policy reforms should be considered for several reasons:
1. Enhancing Access to Evidence: States could implement laws that explicitly grant convicted individuals the right to access certain types of evidence, particularly biological evidence like DNA, which has proven critical in exonerating wrongfully convicted individuals. Legislation could mandate that all relevant evidence be preserved for a specified duration after conviction.
2. Establishing Clear Procedures: States should develop clear and accessible procedures for requesting DNA testing and other forms of evidence post-conviction. This would reduce ambiguity and ensure that individuals understand their rights and how to exercise them.
3. Funding Legal Representation: Many individuals seeking post-conviction relief may lack adequate legal support. Public policy should prioritize funding for legal assistance programs that help navigate the complexities of accessing evidence and pursuing post-conviction claims.
4. Creating Independent Review Boards: Establishing independent boards or commissions tasked with reviewing claims of innocence could help streamline processes and ensure that requests for evidence are handled fairly and transparently.
5. Promoting Public Awareness: Raising awareness about wrongful convictions and the importance of access to evidence can foster public support for necessary reforms. Campaigns can help ensure that society understands the implications of maintaining strict limitations on accessing potentially exonerating evidence.
In conclusion, while Osborne v. District Attorney’s Office established important legal boundaries regarding access to evidence, it also highlights an opportunity for public policy reform aimed at protecting the rights of the accused. By promoting greater access to DNA testing and other forms of evidence through legislative changes and supportive measures, we can ensure a more just legal system that prioritizes both accountability and fairness for all individuals within it.
