Search results
Syllabus. The Sixth Amendment does not grant an accused the right to have counsel present when the Government conducts a post-indictment photographic display, containing a picture of the accused, for the purpose of allowing a witness to attempt an identification of the offender.
Ash was convicted. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed, holding that Ash’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated because his attorney was not given the opportunity to be present for the photo identifications before trial.
A number of informants were asked to identify a number of suspects in connection with a bank robbery. The respondent, Ash (the “respondent”), challenged the identification because counsel was not present at what was arguably a critical stage of the prosecution. Synopsis of Rule of Law.
The FBI, acting on information from an informant, conducted a photographic lineup that included Charles J. Ash, Jr. Among several black-and-white and later, color photographs shown to witnesses of a bank robbery, some identified Ash as the gunman.
UNITED STATES v. ASH is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 21, 1973. The case was argued before the court on January 10, 1973. In a 6-3 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the ruling of the lower court and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion.
United States v. Ash Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained - YouTube. Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223...
413 U.S. 300. Syllabus. The Sixth Amendment does not grant an accused the right to have counsel present when the Government conducts a post-indictment photographic display, containing a picture of the accused, for the purpose of allowing a witness to attempt an identification of the offender.
