The controversial practice of extraordinary rendition has been ...

[eruditmonkey@yahoo.com]

The controversial practice of extraordinary rendition has been approved by the United States Supreme Court.
 
  Indicate whether the statement is true or false

Question 2

Citing cases, what are the restrictions on discovery by the defense?
 
  What will be an ideal response?

[dreamfighter72]

Answer to Question 1

TRUE

Answer to Question 2

Although the Fifth Amendment protects the defendant from disclosing certain incriminating information, he or she may be required to disclose information regarding the defenses he or she intends to use at trial, such as alibis. In Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78 (1970), the Court considered Florida's notice of alibi statute, which required the defendant, at the prosecution's request, to disclose alibi defenses coupled with a list of witnesses who would support them. The Court found that this type of discovery does not violate the Fifth Amendment because it is not self-incriminating. In fact, the purpose of an alibi defense is to exculpate (clear) the defendant. According to the Court, Nothing in the Fifth Amendment privilege entitles a defendant as a matter of constitutional right to await the end of the State's case before announcing the nature of his defense, any more than it entitles him to await the jury's verdict on the State's case-in-chief before deciding whether or not to take the stand himself.

In United States v. Nobles, 422 U.S. 225 (1975), the defense attempted to call a private investigator to the stand whose testimony would have cast doubt on the prosecution's case.
The trial judge ruled that the investigator could not testify until the prosecution received portions of the investigator's pretrial investigative report. The Supreme Court upheld this decision. The defense argued that this decision infringed on the accused's right to compulsory process to call the investigator to the stand.

[eruditmonkey@yahoo.com]

Excellent

[lkanara2]

Gracias!