Lane v. Enoch

Supreme Court of the United States March 3, 1986

Lane v. Enoch, 475 U.S. 1053 (1986)

106 S. Ct. 1281; 89 L. Ed. 2d 588; 54 U.S.L.W. 3580; 1986 U.S. LEXIS 681

Rehnquist, White, Whom

Opinion of the Court

C. A. 7th Cir. Motion of respondents for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.

Dissenting Opinion

Justice White, with whom The Chief Justice and Justice Rehnquist join,

dissenting.

For the reasons I have twice before stated, Smith v. Jago, 470 U. S. 1060 (1985) (dissenting), Taliaferro v. Maryland, 461 U. S. 948 (1983) (dissenting), I dissent from the Court’s refusal to resolve the important question, which has divided the lower courts, of when, if ever, a State may exclude a defense witness on account of a criminal defendant’s failure to comply with a discovery rule.

Reference

Full Case Name: Lane, Director, Illinois Department of Corrections v. Enoch
Cited By: 3 cases
Status: Published