Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The 2002 Supreme Court Decisions: Did They Leave Enough Of Apprendi To Effectively Protect Criminal Defendants?, Charlotte Leclercq
The 2002 Supreme Court Decisions: Did They Leave Enough Of Apprendi To Effectively Protect Criminal Defendants?, Charlotte Leclercq
Northern Illinois University Law Review
This comment explores the true impact of the 2000 landmark decision, Apprendi v. New Jersey, in which the United States Supreme Court determined that any fact that increases a criminal defendant's sentence beyond the statutory maximum has to be submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. At the time, the decision appeared to be a triumph for the procedural due process rights of defendants. However the opinion of the majority, as well as those of the concurrence and dissents, left the actual effect of the decision subject to considerable debate among courts and commentators. In 2002 the …
In Defense Of Federalism: The Need For A Federal Institutional Defender Of State Interests, Kory A. Atkinson
In Defense Of Federalism: The Need For A Federal Institutional Defender Of State Interests, Kory A. Atkinson
Northern Illinois University Law Review
In Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), the United States Supreme Court struck down the state of Arizona's death penalty procedure as violative of the Sixth Amendment's right to trial by jury. The Ring case is noteworthy because the Supreme Court upheld the identical procedure under the same constitutional provision twelve years earlier in Walton v. Arizona, 497 U.S. 639 (1990). The Ring case raises a serious constitutional issue because the high Court reaffirmed its decision upholding Arizona's death penalty procedure twice during those twelve years. The issue is this: what recourse does the state of Arizona have against …
Keynote Address: Northern Illinois University College Of Law Twelfth Annual Symposium On Domestic Violence And Victimizing The Victim: Relief, Results, Reform, Mary Becker
Northern Illinois University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Panel Discussion, Morning Session: Northern Illinois University College Of Law Twelfth Annual Symposium On Domestic Violence And Victimizing The Victim: Relief, Results, Reform, Northern Illinois University Law Review
Panel Discussion, Morning Session: Northern Illinois University College Of Law Twelfth Annual Symposium On Domestic Violence And Victimizing The Victim: Relief, Results, Reform, Northern Illinois University Law Review
Northern Illinois University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Panel Discussion, Afternoon Session: Northern Illinois University College Of Law Twelfth Annual Symposium On Domestic Violence And Victimizing The Victim: Relief, Results, Reform, Northern Illinois University Law Review
Panel Discussion, Afternoon Session: Northern Illinois University College Of Law Twelfth Annual Symposium On Domestic Violence And Victimizing The Victim: Relief, Results, Reform, Northern Illinois University Law Review
Northern Illinois University Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Tangled Web--Complexities, Fallacies And Misconceptions Regarding The Decision To Release Treated Sexual Offenders From Civil Commitment To Society, Leroy L. Kondo
Northern Illinois University Law Review
"When should a treated rapist, child molester or other sexual offender, convicted under a sexually violent predator statute, be released to society?" This question is fraught with multiple levels of complexity in a tangled web of misconceptions, fallacies, myths, and pitfalls reflected in the scientific and legal literature. Several excellent scientific reviews have documented tremendous progress in sexual recidivism research over the past few decades. However, decision-makers (e.g., psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, judges, juries, district attorneys, public defenders, parole officers, and administrators of both correctional facilities and hospitals) remain confronted with a plethora of conceptual landmines and a morass of …
Proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: Shifting Sands Of A Bedrock?, Azhar J. Minhas
Proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: Shifting Sands Of A Bedrock?, Azhar J. Minhas
Northern Illinois University Law Review
It is a "bedrock" principle of our criminal jurisprudence, that the state has the burden of proving the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. A standard jury instruction to this effect is read out to the prospective jurors, prior to jury selection process, hinted upon (to put it mildly) during voir dire, and then again given to the selected jury panel at the close of all the evidence in a trial. In Illinois, however, at no point is the phrase "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" ever defined. In this state, it is assumed as a matter of law, …