United States v. Scheffer - Significance, Airman Scheffer Claims "innocent Ingestion", A Question Of Legitimate Interests, "a Serious Undervaluation" Of Constitutional Rights
That per se exclusion of polygraph evidence offered by the accused in a military court does not violate the Sixth Amendment right to present a defense.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Michael D. Dreeben
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Kim L. Sheffield
Justices for the Court
Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, Clarence Thomas (writing for the Court)
John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
31 March 1998
That Military Rule of Evidence 707, which makes polygraph evidence inadmissible in court-martial proceedings, does not unconstitutionally abridge the right of accused members of the military to present a defense.
- Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (1923).
- Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14 (1967).
- Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (1973).
- Rock v. Arkansas, 483 U.S. 44 (1987).
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
- United States v. Ursery - Significance, Guy Ursery Grows His Own, Various Items, Emerald Cut Stones, And 89 Firearms
- United States v. Rita Gluzman: 1997 - From Asylum To Affluence, Rita Prosecuted Under Federal Statute, Courts Dismiss Appeals
- United States v. Scheffer - Further Readings
- United States v. Scheffer - Significance
- United States v. Scheffer - Airman Scheffer Claims "innocent Ingestion"
- United States v. Scheffer - A Question Of Legitimate Interests
- United States v. Scheffer - "a Serious Undervaluation" Of Constitutional Rights
- United States v. Scheffer - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias