Skip navigation
Punch and Jurists

Dixon v. U.S., No. 05-7053 (U.S. Supreme Court) (548 U.S. 1; 126 S.Ct. 2437) (June 22, 2006) (Justice Stevens)

Loaded on May 1, 2006 published in Punch and Jurists May 15, 2006
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Burden of Proof.

This is an interesting, albeit somewhat philosophical, decision that explores a creative argument about who has the burden of proving - or disproving - the affirmative defense of duress. The Court explained the essence of that defense as follows:

“Like the defense of necessity, the defense of duress does not ...

 

Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.

As a digital subscriber to Punch and Jurists, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login

More from this issue:

  1. Woodford v. Ngo, No. 05-416 (U.S. Supreme Court) (548 U.S. 81; 126 S.Ct. 2378) (June 22, 2006) (Justice Alito)
  2. Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, No. 04-1376 (U.S. Supreme Court) (548 U.S. 30; 126 S.Ct. 2422) (June 22, 2006) (Justice Souter)
  3. Davis v. Washington, No. 05-5224 (U.S. Supreme Court) (547 U.S. 813; 126 S.Ct. 2266) (June 19, 2006) (Justice Scalia)
  4. Samson v. California, No. 04-9728 (U.S. Supreme Court) (547 U.S. 843; 126 S.Ct. 2193) (June 19, 2006) (Justice Thomas)
  5. Dixon v. U.S., No. 05-7053 (U.S. Supreme Court) (548 U.S. 1; 126 S.Ct. 2437) (June 22, 2006) (Justice Stevens)
  6. U.S. v. Scott, No. 04-10090 (9th Cir.) (450 F.3d 863) (June 9, 2006) (Judge Alex Kozinski)
  7. U.S. v. Cage, No. 05-2079 (10th Cir.) (451 F.3d 585) (June 8, 2006) (Judge Carlos Lucero)

More from these topics: