Skip to main content
Article
Counsel and Confrontation
Minnesota Law Review (2009)
  • Todd E. Pettys
Abstract
Responding to the Court’s recent reworking of its confrontation jurisprudence, I argue that, under the Anglo-American common-law principles that the Confrontation Clause now incorporates, defendants are not entitled to an attorney’s assistance when interrogating witnesses prior to trial. Although the Assistance of Counsel Clause and the Due Process Clauses will pick up the slack in many cases, I contend that there are other instances in which the Constitution now leaves unrepresented defendants responsible for cross-examining witnesses on their own. I suggest that legislative reform may be necessary to ameliorate the new constitutional landscape’s deficiencies.
Keywords
  • counsel,
  • attorney,
  • confrontation,
  • sixth amendment
Disciplines
Publication Date
Fall 2009
Citation Information
Todd E. Pettys. "Counsel and Confrontation" Minnesota Law Review Vol. 94 Iss. 1 (2009)
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/todd_pettys/2/