Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Effective Assistance Of Counsel: Chance Or Guarantee?, Joanne Legano
The Effective Assistance Of Counsel: Chance Or Guarantee?, Joanne Legano
Fordham Urban Law Journal
This Comment reviews the historical development of the right to effective assistance of counsel for criminal defendants as defined by the Supreme Court, and discusses the various standards applied by lower federal courts. This Comment next examines United States v. Decoster, which provides the most comprehensive judicial analysis of the right to effective assistance of counsel at this juncture in time. The standards applied by the New York State courts are also analyzed. Finally, the author recommends uniform guidelines for evaluating claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Systematic Exclusion Of Cognizable Groups By Use Of Peremptory Challenges, Stephen W. Dicker
Systematic Exclusion Of Cognizable Groups By Use Of Peremptory Challenges, Stephen W. Dicker
Fordham Urban Law Journal
An integral part of the jury selection process is the individual challenge, where a party has the privilege to remove potentially biased jurors. There are two forms of the individual challenge: for cause and peremptory. For cause challenges must be based on a legally provable bias, whereas peremptory challenges may be used to remove jurors who possess a bias peculiar to the immediate case, but whose bias is not articulable in terms of a challenge for cause. Given the vague underpinnings and potential abuses of the peremptory challenge, legislatures enforce a limitation on the number of such challenges a party …
Constitutional Law- Sixth Amendment- Systematic Exclusion Of Women From Jury Service Violates The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments. Taylor V. Louisiana, 95 S. Ct. 692 (1975)., Kenneth J. Mulvey Jr.
Constitutional Law- Sixth Amendment- Systematic Exclusion Of Women From Jury Service Violates The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments. Taylor V. Louisiana, 95 S. Ct. 692 (1975)., Kenneth J. Mulvey Jr.
Fordham Urban Law Journal
Appellant, a male, was convicted in a Louisiana state court of aggravated kidnapping. Prior to his trial, he had moved to quash the petit jury venire on the ground that women had been systematically excluded from it. Under the Louisiana Constitution and criminal procedure statutes, a woman could not be selected for jury service unless she had filed a written declaration with the court clerk of her desire to serve on a jury. The trial court denied appellant's motion. The Supreme Court of Louisiana affirmed, determining that the statutory provisions were "neither irrational nor discriminatory"' and thus did not violate …