Constitutional Law 101 - Due Process - [4th, 5th and 6th, 8th, 9th, and 10th Ammedments]

IV. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by Oath or affirmation, and particulary describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

  • Right to not be victimized by warrantless seizures (4th)

V. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

  • Right to indictment by Grand Jury, not government (5th)

  • Right of freedom from double-jeopardy (5th)

  • Right to not incriminate self (5th)

  • Right to life, liberty, and property. Cannot be deprived of without due process of law (5th)

  • Property may not be taken by state without just compensation (5th)

VI. In all criminal prosecustions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him, to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

  • Right to speedy trial in criminal case (6th)

  • Right to impartial jury in the district where crime committed (6th)

  • Right to be informed of the nature and cause of accusations (6th)

  • Right to confront witnesses (6th)

  • Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14 (1967)
  • Right to compel witnesses to testify in your defense (6th)

  • Right to assistance of Counsel in Criminal prosecutions (6th)

  • Grosjean v. American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233, 243-244 (1936) ("the fundamental right of the accused to the aid of counsel in a criminal prosecution" is "safeguarded against state action by the due process of law clause of the Fourteenth Amendment").
    United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 653 (1984) ("Without counsel, the right to a trial itself would be of little avail")
    McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 771, n. 14 (1970) ("the right to counsel is the right to the effective assistance of counsel.)
  • Right of trial by jury (6th)

VIII. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

  • Right to be free of cruel or unusual punishment (8th)

IX. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

  • Rights not enumerated in the Constitution are retained by the people (9th)

X. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

  • Rights not enumerated in the Constitution are retained by the people (10th)


  • Right of prisoners of access to court

  • Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. Of Durham City, 452 U.S. 18 (1981) (parental rights)
    Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371 (1971) (divorce)
    Wong Yang Sung v. McGrath, 339 U.S. 33, 49-50 (1950) (deportation)
  • Right to a reasonable notice or due notice of the laws which one is bound to obey

  • 26 CFR Sec.601.702(a)(2)(ii) (publication in federal register before enforceable) 5 U.S.C. Sec.553(b) 44 U.S.C. Sec.1505(a), (c )(2)

    Holden v. Hardy, 169 U.S. 366 (1898) (It is sufficient to say that there are certain immutable principles of justice which inhere in the very idea of free government which no member of the Union may disregard, as that no man shall be condemned in his person or property without due notice and an opportunity of being heard in his own defense.)
    Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932) (It never has been doubted by this court, or any other, so far as we know, that notice and hearing are preliminary steps essential to the passing of an enforceable judgment, and that they, together with a legally competent tribunal having jurisdiction of the case, constitute basic elements of the constitutional requirement of due process of law.)
  • Right of an indigent defendant to a free transcript in aid of appealing his conviction for violating city ordinances

  • Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12 (1956)
  • Right of freedom from institutional confinement

  • Schall v. Martin, 467 U.S. 253 (1984) (children have a protected liberty interest in "freedom from institutional restraints)
    Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993)
  • Right to meaningful opportunity to present a defense

  • Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683, 690 (1986) (quoting California v. Trombletta, 467 U.S. 479, 485 (1984)) ("the Constitution guarantees criminal defendants `a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.`"
  • Right to a fair trial of impartial jurors

  • Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333 at 350-351 (1966)
    Gentile v. State Bar of Nevada, 501 U.S. 1030 (1991)
    Turner v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 466, 73 (1965) (evidence in criminal trial must come solely from witness stand in public courtroom with full evidentiary protections).
  • Lawyers enjoy a broad monopoly or right to do things that other citizens may not lawfully do

  • Supreme Court of NH v. Piper, 470 U.S. 274 (1985) ( Lawyers do enjoy a "broad monopoly . . . to do things other citizens may not lawfully do." In re Griffiths, 413 U.S. 717, GO>731 (1973))

    Note: Know the difference between legal and lawful. Within the jurisdiction where you put your 'X', lawyers can break the lawful laws legally! And ALL judges are lawyers. Perhaps you can see why an Oath taken to protect and defend the Constitution for the united States is so important and why the people who take them should be upright and stay in honour.

    Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
    There are those who turn justice into bitterness and cast righteousness to the ground.
    Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent-- the LORD detests them both.
    Therefore the law is paralyzed, and justice never prevails. The wicked hem in the righteous, so that justice is perverted.

Research perfomed from 'without the United States'. [ 28 U.S. Code Sec. 1746 ]




Peace be unto you. Thank you for visiting!