This document is a page from a 2005 B.Y.U. Law Review article (page 27 of 52 in the submission) submitted by attorney David Schoen to the House Oversight Committee. It discusses the constitutional rights of victims and the public to attend criminal trials in the local community (vicinage) under Article III, the First Amendment, and the Sixth Amendment. The text argues that victims have a compelling interest in observing proceedings and should have the right to be heard regarding venue transfer decisions under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA).
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article (page 46 of 78 in the exhibit) submitted by attorney David Schoen to the House Oversight Committee (Bates: HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017681). The text analyzes the legal rights of crime victims to attend trials and have input on venue transfers, citing Supreme Court precedents and the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It specifically discusses the New Jersey case *State v. Timmendequas* as an example of prioritizing victims' convenience by importing a jury rather than moving the trial location.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity