Research paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 9

Research Paper Example Foner reveals that prior to the trial, the defendants enjoyed access to lawyers. Consequently, the defendants had insignificant time for planning defense. 2 He has added that, the defendants appealed against the above ruling on the basis of inadequate legal counsel. Notably, the supreme court of Alabama ruled by a vote of six against one that there was a fair trial. Considerably, it is noteworthy pointing out that Anderson, the chief justice, produced a tough nonconformist opinion that resulted to an appeal to the Supreme Court in the US against the ruling. The Court’s Ruling Hoffmann et al indicates that, during the ruling, the supreme US’s Supreme Court majority opinion overturned and remanded the ruling of the supreme court of Alabama, maintaining that the court had violated the due process. Notably, the Supreme Court’s decision rested on three significant arguments; firstly, the defendants did not receive fair, unbiased and purposeful trial. Secondly, they di d not access the right of counsel, with the familiar consultation incidents and a chance for trial. Lastly, the trial took place before juries chosen racially from unqualified people; hence systematically excluding qualified juries. It is worthwhile noting that the conviction was unlawful since the accused did not access the counsel’s assistance right from their arraignment up to the commencement of their trial. This led to breaching the due process section of the 14th Amendment. Foner indicates `that the section, counsel has to be certain to anybody subject to the likelihood of a death sentence, be it in state or else federal courts.3 Conclusively, our group does not support the court’s ruling because as indicated above, had interfered with state courts; hence, going beyond its jurisdiction. Consequently, our group has agreed with the above discussed dissenting opinions because the trial court had really acted upon the laid down procedures. The only missing point is t he lack of representation for the defendants. However, one should note that a court has its own individual reasons to at times deviate from norms especially if the situation calls for the same. Notably, the US Supreme Court did not conduct situational analysis before delivering its ruling. 4 Consequences/implications of the Ruling Assuming the court it is absolutely devoid of merit, all other claims that the petitioners’ constitutional rights got violated, positions its viewpoint and ruling upon a solitary declaration of reality. Furthermore, the petitioners did not access the right of counsel, with the familiar consultation incidents and preparation opportunity for trial. If this is factual, they were deprived of the due process of law; hence, they were at liberty to have the rulings against them upturned, however, there are no records for such denial. Hoffmann et al argues that nine defendants, together with Patterson, were charged for one condemnation, and he was as well u nconnectedly indicted. As opposed to trying using the en masse, the government provided four trials; hence lessening the risk of error and unfairness that unavoidably attends an effort in a particular trial to determine the culpability or blamelessness of the accused.5 Dissenting opinions If right, the judgment that the malfunction of the trial court to grant petitioners time as