“[T]he Barr-Walker proceedings are criminal rather than civil in nature and constitute an essentially independent rather than a sentencing proceeding. The Act leaves no doubt, both in its language and purpose, that -it is a criminal statute and what is imposed under its authority is criminal punishment”
How later courts described this case
- “[T]he Barr-Walker proceedings are criminal rather than civil in nature and constitute an essentially independent rather than a sentencing proceeding. The Act leaves no doubt, both in its language and purpose, that -it is a criminal statute and what is imposed under its authority is criminal punishment”
- “It is undoubtedly true that the guarantee of the right of confrontation and cross-examination does not apply to sentencing pursuant to a criminal conviction.”
- 'due process cannot be satisfied by partial or niggardly procedural protections' in proceedings under Pennsylvania's Sex Offender Act
- quoted in Specht v. Patterson, supra at 609
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
STALEY, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
I concur in the result reached by my Brother Freedman that petitioner *316 was denied due process. I agree that he was denied the right to confront and cross-examine his accusers. Pointer v. State of Texas, 380 U.S. 400 , 85 S.Ct. 1065 , 13 L.Ed.2d 923 (1965); Douglas v. State of Alabama, 380 U.S. 415 , 85 S. Ct. 1074 , 13 L.Ed.2d 934 (1965). I further agree “that petitioner’s commitment is invalid, because [these] * * * constitutional rights were violated.” However, I cannot accede to the disposition made of petitioner’s argument that he was denied his right to trial by jury. My Brother Freedman refrains from deciding the issue of whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires a trial by jury in state criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court has explicitly ruled that he has no such right. Fay v. People of State of New York, 332 U.S. 261, 288 , 67 S.Ct. 1613 , 91 L.Ed. 2043 (1947); Snyder v. Com. of Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97, 105 , 54 S.Ct. 330 , 78 L.Ed. 674 (1934); Jordan v. Com. of Massachusetts, 225 U.S. 167, 176 , 32 S.Ct. 651 , 56 L.Ed. 1038 (1912); Maxwell v. Dow, 176 U.S. 581, 602-603 , 20 S.Ct. 494 , 44 L.Ed. 597 (1900); Application of Tune, 230 F.2d 883, 886 (C.A.3, 1956).