Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Hare And Hounds: The Fugitive Defendant's Constitutional Right To Be Pursued, Bruce A. Green
Hare And Hounds: The Fugitive Defendant's Constitutional Right To Be Pursued, Bruce A. Green
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Impeachment Exception To The Exclusionary Rules: Policies, Principles, And Politics, The , James L. Kainen
Impeachment Exception To The Exclusionary Rules: Policies, Principles, And Politics, The , James L. Kainen
Faculty Scholarship
The exclusionary evidence rules derived from the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments continue to play an important role in constitutional criminal procedure, despite the intense controversy that surrounds them. The primary justification for these rules has shifted from an "imperative of judicial integrity" to the "deterrence of police conduct that violates... [constitutional] rights." Regardless of the justification it uses for the rules' existence, the Supreme Court continues to limit their breadth "at the margin," when "the acknowledged costs to other values vital to a rational system of criminal justice" outweigh the deterrent effects of exclusion. The most notable limitation on …
Wanted: A Federal Standard For Evaluationg The Adequate State Forum , Maria Marcus
Wanted: A Federal Standard For Evaluationg The Adequate State Forum , Maria Marcus
Faculty Scholarship
This Article argues that the federal judiciary should upgrade its present scrutiny of state forum adequacy in conformity with constitutional and congressional directives. Fortunately, a standard for such heightened scrutiny already exists in the Supreme Court's own jurisprudence.
Power Not Reason: Justice Marshall's Valedictory And The Fourth Amendment In The Supreme Court's 1990 Term , Bruce A. Green
Power Not Reason: Justice Marshall's Valedictory And The Fourth Amendment In The Supreme Court's 1990 Term , Bruce A. Green
Faculty Scholarship
In its 1990 Term, the United States Supreme Court heard five cases involving the Fourth Amendment. In this article, Professor Bruce Green analyzes these five search-and-seizure decisions in light of Justice Marshall's criticism that '[Plower, not reason, is the new currency of this Court's decision-making." He examines the various considerations the Court advances in its Fourth Amendment analysis-interpretive principle, policy, and precedent--and discovers inconsistencies in the importance assigned to each of these considerations in a series of cases decided very close together by virtually the same Justices. Each approach controlled, Professor Green argues, only when it could be said to …