Gregory Cooper v. Katy Poole, et al.
Whether the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides for due process when the State compels a defendant to testify against himself by threat of taking all of his counsel's assets
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . |Law adefeudant be Stared mg hi AccuUsers aud wit ne Se 5 from Con tee nting his ny When tne Sin Amendment te the Us. LonSt. Provides Far OUt Process? 2/17 O defendants Louse | Com eelles defeu daut to wet t45tit¥ bY threat of ta Kins au the Are yo Couusel iS \ta vlalation 6 Yne btu Mendnint ds tne U.S, Lonst.? 3. Roe ConictionS ob batved ww vialation of due |Praceds of law under Ynew.c. Const Am TC, Seer W3sWGi aud 19 what Jursdictyn does the Cowickn§ Aauct have over tne Person of th defendeut When Cauusel for twis Purfsse ifnot Present ¢ y Can tho tt to Counsel be waived when a Couusels deferdant did not watved the tidh+ Know nal Ys oY with aut Aucledse BE Consent aud avald Conviction be alstained in Gceerd oth Vhe U.S. Const. Am.Sauab aud the AC. Lontt. Act. Tw Secltaud 337 5, TS *& Cruel aud Unesal Pun'Shmenrt UUrder tho Wh Am. ko the US Lonst. ko \meesq. a. 12/7 Soutenc® ana defeudaut Who was denied the nit be Pfeceut CUidente in his awn dofense Whaon Wwe (re foutt. Sth amendment Provides CF ducevace So aud. dofeudin ts ouusel met ge tA wece Caused the dexial af Nhat visit Vile. the. th OWeoudment t2 the U.S, Coust, Prov’ des fof eSfective Louuse 12 . LCE Countel 1S Never Present iN au effective wal oeS The Court have Subsect matter Suvidsetiom \N Awial SON 82 ' ? \ A