This study has presented a comprehensive historical overview of the context and significance of a, criminal defendants constitutional right to due process of law. The evidence suggests that, in many circumstances, a criminal defendant is not being afforded our most basic constitutional guarantee of fairness and justice for allOne of the primary objectives of this study was to develop a working definition for journalists to better understand the fundamental concepts of a defendants right to exculpatory evidence during criminal proceedings.Since 1791, the Supreme Court has had to continually broaden a criminal defendants right to exculpatory information. In case after case, a similar fad pattern has shown that pauper criminal defendants with court appointed attorneys having to compete against state or federal prosecutors with unlimited investigative and legal research funding This disparity is further compounded when the state or government prosecutors define to turn over information or evidence which could help the defendants case.Further analysis identified other problem areas within the scope of due process which deserve significant attention such as: the grand jury process, plea-bargains, probable cause warrants, and post-conviction hearings. / Department of Journalism

Although some literature exists that examines special education due process practices, the studies have been done in different ways and consequently result in different outcomes. Therefore the purpose of this study was to examine the one-and two-tier due process system in the United States. The study focused on national practices of due process, issues disputed, and disability categories involved in special education conflicts. A survey of the 50 state directors of special education and the director from the District of Columbia was conducted to obtain information concerning due process hearings and dispute resolution for the time period 1986-1987 to 1990-1991. Records of all reported special education litigation for the same time period were obtained from the Law Offices of Charles L. Weatherly in Atlanta, Georgia. Data from the states providing due process information were analyzed with a t-test. The remaining data, both from the survey instrument and litigation records, were analyzed using qualitative analysis, frequency counts, and percentages of the raw data. Findings of the study reveal a slight national trend toward a one-tier due process system for special education dispute resolution. Furthermore, placement remains the most frequently litigated issue, and specific learning disability the most frequently involved category in special education disputes. Finally, there is no predictable relationship between the size of the disability population and the volume of special education litigation. The results of the study evidenced the need for continued research of national practices of due process. Additional research is also needed in the areas of mediation, the costs of due process hearings, and hearing officer's authorization to award attorney fees. / Ed. D.