Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 12 of 12
Full-Text Articles in Law
Crawford V. Washington: Reclaiming The Original Meaning Of The Confrontation Clause, Danielle Dupre
Crawford V. Washington: Reclaiming The Original Meaning Of The Confrontation Clause, Danielle Dupre
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People V. Cortes, Jennifer Feldman
Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People V. Cortes, Jennifer Feldman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Paul, Adam D'Antonio
Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Paul, Adam D'Antonio
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Appellate Division, First Department, People V. Bradley, Kathleen Egan
Appellate Division, First Department, People V. Bradley, Kathleen Egan
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
You Blew It: The Confrontation Clause & Breathalyzers As Testimonial Evidence, Stephanie Tuorto
You Blew It: The Confrontation Clause & Breathalyzers As Testimonial Evidence, Stephanie Tuorto
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
An Overview Of The October 2005 Supreme Court Term, Erwin Chemerinsky
An Overview Of The October 2005 Supreme Court Term, Erwin Chemerinsky
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Family Court, Queens County, In Re German F. And Hector R., Angelique Hermanowski
Family Court, Queens County, In Re German F. And Hector R., Angelique Hermanowski
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court, Queens County, People V. Tam, Elaine Yang
Supreme Court, Queens County, People V. Tam, Elaine Yang
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People V. Mcfarley, Erica R. Borgese
Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People V. Mcfarley, Erica R. Borgese
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. Nieves-Andino, Jason Gines
Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. Nieves-Andino, Jason Gines
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Making The Right Call For Confrontation At Felony Sentencing, Shaakirrah R. Sanders
Making The Right Call For Confrontation At Felony Sentencing, Shaakirrah R. Sanders
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Felony sentencing courts have discretion to increase punishment based on un-cross-examined testimonial statements about several categories of uncharged, dismissed, or otherwise unproven criminal conduct. Denying defendants an opportunity to cross-examine these categories of sentencing evidence undermines a core principle of natural law as adopted in the Sixth Amendment: those accused of felony crimes have the right to confront adversarial witnesses. This Article contributes to the scholarship surrounding confrontation rights at felony sentencing by cautioning against continued adherence to the most historic Supreme Court case on this issue, Williams v. New York. This Article does so for reasons beyond the unacknowledged …
Gender-Conscious Confrontation: The Accuser-Obligation Approach Revisited, Michael El-Zein
Gender-Conscious Confrontation: The Accuser-Obligation Approach Revisited, Michael El-Zein
Michigan Journal of Gender & Law
The Supreme Court’s recent Confrontation Clause decisions have had a dramatic effect on domestic violence prosecution throughout the United States, sparking debate about possible solutions to an increasingly difficult trial process for prosecutors and the survivors they represent. In this Note, I revisit and reinterpret the suggestion by Professor Sherman J. Clark in his article, An Accuser-Obligation Approach to the Confrontation Clause,1 that we should view the Confrontation Clause primarily as an obligation of the accuser rather than a right of the accused. Specifically, I reevaluate Clark’s proposition using a gendered lens, ultimately suggesting a novel solution to the problem …