Digital Commons Network^™

The Rational Basis Test And Why It Is So Irrational: An Eighty-Year Retrospective, James M. Mcgoldrick Jr.

San Diego Law Review

The Rational Basis test is one of the most common and yet perhaps the most insignificant United States Supreme Court test in the history of the constitution, yet year in year out clients and lawyers will submit another brief hoping against hope that this time there might be a meaningful outcome. There will not be.

This article attempts to explain why the rational basis test is so irrational in its outcome, why basic interests are disregarded in the name of judicial respect for the legislative process, and how easy it would be for there to be a better outcome. The …

Double Jeopardy V. Double Punishment--Confusion In California, Michael J. Bruce

San Diego Law Review

This Article proposes to clarify this area of criminal practice. California Penal Code § 1023, prohibiting multiple prosecutions, and California Penal Code § 654, prohibiting multiple punishment for the same act or omission, are often misapplied by the California criminal courts. California Penal Code § 1023 sets down two tests to determine whether jeopardy has attached: the "identity of the offense" test and the "necessarily included offense" test. California Penal Code § 654 proscribes double punishment using concurrent sentencing, and prevents double jeopardy using not only the "necessarily included offense" test from § 1023, but also a broader "indivisible transaction" …