Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 31 - 36 of 36
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Seizing Opportunity, Searching For Theory: Article I, Section 7, George R. Nock
Seizing Opportunity, Searching For Theory: Article I, Section 7, George R. Nock
Seattle University Law Review
Washington case law dealing with searches and seizures has now reached a developmental stage from which it can proceed either haphazardly or along any of several well-defined lines. The purpose of this Article is not to provide a compendium of Washington search-and-seizure cases. Rather, the Article analyzes the more recent (and some of the earlier) cases in which the Washington Supreme Court has interpreted article I, section 7, and suggests several alternative theoretical bases for the further development of Washington constitutional search-and-seizure jurisprudence.
A Constitutional Right To An Appeal: Guarding Against Unacceptable Risks Of Erroneous Conviction, James E. Lobsenz
A Constitutional Right To An Appeal: Guarding Against Unacceptable Risks Of Erroneous Conviction, James E. Lobsenz
Seattle University Law Review
The many consequences of "constitutionalizing" the right to appeal become evident only when one answers certain underlying questions about the nature of an appeal. What are the essential elements of an appeal? Why should we view the criminal defendant's right to appeal as an element of due process of law? Part II of this Article seeks to develop a theoretical due process framework for use in deciding when the right to appeal under article I, section 22 of the Washington Constitution has been unconstitutionally abridged or denied. Part III contains an analysis of oral argument as an essential element of …
The Establishment Clause And The Free Exercise Clause Of The Washington Constitution—A Proposal To The Supreme Court, Frank J. Conklin, James M. Vaché
The Establishment Clause And The Free Exercise Clause Of The Washington Constitution—A Proposal To The Supreme Court, Frank J. Conklin, James M. Vaché
Seattle University Law Review
This Article traces the independent development in the case law interpreting the Washington Constitution and in the drafting of the document itself. It is the position of the authors that the strict approach and consequent rigorous, independent analysis by the Washington court is not a necessary or appropriate method of deciding church-state issues, at least in many contexts. When examining establishment clause issues under the state constitution, the Washington State Supreme Court should therefore modify its previous position and adopt a more common-sense approach in lieu of the doctrinaire rigidity that has characterized prior opinions.
Washington's Equal Rights Amendment: It Says What It Means And It Means What It Says, Patricia L. Proebsting
Washington's Equal Rights Amendment: It Says What It Means And It Means What It Says, Patricia L. Proebsting
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment begins with a discussion of the ERA's legislative history and the legislature's attempt to bring state statutes into compliance with the ERA upon its passage. Next, judicial interpretations of the new constitutional guarantee are compared to the interpretation of the Washington Constitution's privileges and immunities clause. Finally, the Comment compares Washington's standard of review with a similar standard used by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and argues that the Washington Supreme Court should adopt the absolute standard applied by the Pennsylvania courts.
Freedom And Diversity In A Federal System: Perspectives On State Constitutions And The Washington Declaration Of Rights, Justice Robert F. Utter
Freedom And Diversity In A Federal System: Perspectives On State Constitutions And The Washington Declaration Of Rights, Justice Robert F. Utter
Seattle University Law Review
Increasingly, Washington courts are being asked to consider our Declaration as an independent and effective source of protection for individual rights, including some rights not recognized or protected by the United States Supreme Court, and to give our state constitution a truly independent interpretation. No matter how sympathetic they may be to such requests, lawyers and judges face at least three major problems in making a truly independent interpretation of a state constitutional provision. First, they must justify departing from precedents laid down by the United States Supreme Court, a step which makes many people understandably uncomfortable until the differing …
Proposed Citizens Right To Standing Act-Finding The Keys To Unlock The Courthouse Doors, Harold W. Wood, Jr.
Proposed Citizens Right To Standing Act-Finding The Keys To Unlock The Courthouse Doors, Harold W. Wood, Jr.
Seattle University Law Review
Recent Supreme Court decisions severely restrict the right of citizens to litigate in federal courts. The Court's standing requirements not only limit the ability of citizens to successfully invoke federal court jurisdiction, but also confuse lower courts and litigants attempting to apply the requirements. Standing requirements have met with increasing criticism. And Congress is now considering legislative modification of standing doctrine. Unfortunately, the Court's employment of constitutional foundations in establishing current standing requirements imposes substantial roadblocks Congress must avoid to enact remedial standing legislation. This comment examines the constitutional and pragmatic difficulties of statutory modification of standing requirements and recommends …