This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Constitutional Law

Feb. 16, 2000

No Merit

These cases are significant losses for indigent defendants who do not have the resources to hire lawyers and instead must rely on appointed counsel.

Erwin Chemerinsky

Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law, UC Berkeley School of Law

Erwin's most recent book is "Worse Than Nothing: The Dangerous Fallacy of Originalism." He is also the author of "Closing the Courthouse," (Yale University Press 2017).

By Erwin Chemerinsky
        In two recent decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court has narrowed the rights of criminal defendants on appeal. In Smith v. Robbins, 120 S.Ct. 746 ( 2000), and Martinez v. California, 120 S.Ct. 684 ( 2000), the court reversed two 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decisions that had protected criminal defendants on direct appeal of their criminal convicti...

To continue reading, please subscribe.

Already a subscriber?

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)