Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Sarno V. Illinois Crime Investigating Commission, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Sarno V. Illinois Crime Investigating Commission, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Zicarelli V. New Jersey State Commission Of Investigation, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Zicarelli V. New Jersey State Commission Of Investigation, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Couch V. United States, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Couch V. United States, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Kastigar V. United States, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Kastigar V. United States, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Criminal Procedure--Self-Incrimination--Harmless Error--Application Of The Harmless Error Doctrine To Violations Of Miranda: The California Experience, Michigan Law Review
Criminal Procedure--Self-Incrimination--Harmless Error--Application Of The Harmless Error Doctrine To Violations Of Miranda: The California Experience, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Using decisions of the appellate courts of California that have applied the federal harmless error rule to violations of Miranda v. Arizona and Escobedo v. Illinois, this Note will examine the logic and effects of the California application. However, the California experience can only be understood by first briefly describing the United States Supreme Court's decisions regarding harmless constitutional error and then showing the approaches taken by other states in their application of the harmless error rule to Miranda violations. Not only will this analysis put the California experience in its proper perspective, but it will also show the …
Constitutional Law--Double Jeopardy--Collateral Estoppel Is Constitutionally Required In Criminal Cases Because It Is Embodied In The Fifth Amendment Double Jeopardy Clause--Ashe V. Swenson, Michigan Law Review
Constitutional Law--Double Jeopardy--Collateral Estoppel Is Constitutionally Required In Criminal Cases Because It Is Embodied In The Fifth Amendment Double Jeopardy Clause--Ashe V. Swenson, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
It is, therefore, important in any analysis of the Ashe decision to examine the policies and purposes behind collateral estoppel and double jeopardy and the current effectiveness of the two doctrines in light of these policies and purposes. The policies of the double jeopardy guarantee are well defined in the federal cases. Basically, it is recognized that the state, having at hand many more resources than the average defendant can muster, should not be allowed to make successive attempts to convict an individual for an alleged offense. Successive prosecutions cause the defendant expense and embarrassment and force him to live …