Digital Commons Network^™

On The Threshold Of Wainwright V Sykes: Federal Habeas Court Scrutiny Of State Procedural Rules And Rulings, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines specific problems which stand on the threshold of Wainwright v. Sykes. Resolution of these problems is necessary to determine whether a state ruling is based upon an adequate state procedural ground, requiring application of the cause-and-prejudice test before habeas review will be permitted. Part I analyzes the rationale for the rule of Wainwright v. Sykes as well as its historical underpinnings. Part II examines the treatment of state court decisions that are based both on a defaulted claim and, in the alternative, on the merits of that claim. This Part concludes that decisions containing such alternative …

Policymaking And Politics In The Federal District Courts, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Policymaking and Politics in the Federal District Courts by Robert A. Carp and C.K. Rowland

An Appellate Court Dilemma And A Solution Through Subject Matter Organization, Daniel J. Meador

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The recent litigation explosion presents a two-pronged dilemma for American appellate courts. If, on the one hand, the number of appellate judges is not expanded to keep abreast of growing case loads, there is a risk that courts will rely too heavily on professional staff, thereby watering down the decision-making process. If, on the other hand, the number of judges is proportionately increased with the growth in appellate litigation, the number of three-judge decisional units will also increase, thereby threatening predictability and uniformity in the law of the jurisdiction. This Article undertakes to explain that dilemma and to offer a …

Beyond Custody: Expanding Collateral Review Of State Convictions, Timothy C. Hester

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This article advocates extension of collateral review to embrace all parties alleging deprivation of federally guaranteed rights in the state criminal process, regardless of whether the party fulfills the habeas corpus custody requirement. Part I assesses the sufficiency of Supreme Court certiorari jurisdiction to monitor adequately state adjudications of federal constitutional rights, coupled with an evaluation of the technical competency and institutional posture of state courts. Part II examines the significance of the custody limitation on collateral review, both as a substantive element of habeas corpus relief and as a mechanism for funnelling limited judicial resources. Part III presents two …

The Proposed Federal Rules Of Evidence: Of Privileges And The Division Of Rule-Making Power, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note proposes that the lower federal courts accord the same binding authority to the Proposed Rules that they give those judicially promulgated procedural rules, such as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that have been implicitly approved by Congress.

Part I of the Note analyzes the constitutional division of the rule-making power by examining both the policy considerations involved and the relevant constitutional language and doctrines. That examination indicates that the power to establish such rules is shared by Congress and the Supreme Court. To determine when that power is appropriately exercised by one branch rather than the other, …

The Politics Of Federal Judicial Administration, Paul D. Carrington

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Politics of Federal Judicial Administration by Peter Graham Fish