Amendment 6 — Evidence Introduced By Defendant

prev | next

Sixth Amendment :

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

The Court’s Sixth Amendment jurisprudence illustrates that the right to confront witnesses does not amount to a right to confront witnesses with all available evidence.[1](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-6/evidence-introduced-by-defendant#fn1amd6 " See Michigan v. Lucas, 500 U.S. 145, 151 (1991) ( “We have indicated that probative evidence may, in certain circumstances, be precluded when a criminal defendant fails to comply with a valid discovery rule.” ). ") For instance, a defendant did not have a right to confront a rape victim with evidence of a prior sexual relationship where the defendant failed to comply with a state law conditioning admission of such evidence on notice and hearing requirements.[2](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-6/evidence-introduced-by-defendant#fn2amd6 " Id. at 152–53. ") The Court concluded that “[t]he notice-and-hearing requirement serves legitimate state interests in protecting against surprise, harassment, and undue delay.” [3](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-6/evidence-introduced-by-defendant#fn3amd6 " Id. ")

Footnotes

1

See Michigan v. Lucas, 500 U.S. 145 , 151 (1991) ( “We have indicated that probative evidence may, in certain circumstances, be precluded when a criminal defendant fails to comply with a valid discovery rule.” ).

2

Id. at 152–53.

3

Id.