Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Immunity In The Criminal Proceeding Of Foreign Countries, G. Tulaganova
The Immunity In The Criminal Proceeding Of Foreign Countries, G. Tulaganova
Review of law sciences
In this article is given the notion of immunity of evidence, problem of immunity of evidence in criminal proceduring legislation in developing countries, the exemtion is given to evidence. Moreover, to give recommendation to develop norms of national criminal proceduring legislation.
Calling Crawford: Minnesota Declares A 911 Call Non-Testimonial In State V. Wright, Alistair Y. Raymond
Calling Crawford: Minnesota Declares A 911 Call Non-Testimonial In State V. Wright, Alistair Y. Raymond
Maine Law Review
In State v. Wright, 1 the State of Minnesota charged David Wright with possession of a firearm by a felon and two counts of second-degree assault against his girlfriend and her sister. A jury found Wright guilty on all charges and sentenced him to sixty months in jail for each crime, with sentences served concurrently. Wright’s girlfriend, R.R., and her sister, S.R., did not testify against him at trial. The prosecution, however, used the transcript of a 911 call placed by R.R. against Wright in the trial. Although the 911 call was hearsay, the court admitted it under Minnesota’s excited …
State V. Thurston: An Examination Of Assualt, Self-Defense, And Trespass In Relation To Domestic Violence, Megan E. Magoon
State V. Thurston: An Examination Of Assualt, Self-Defense, And Trespass In Relation To Domestic Violence, Megan E. Magoon
Maine Law Review
Darrell Thurston and Suzanne Harmon were romantically involved on an intermittent basis for five years and had one child together. As a result of an altercation that took place at Harmon’s home in Sullivan, Maine, on September 27, 2007, between Thurston and Harmon, Thurston was charged with assault, criminal mischief, and obstructing report of crime or injury. The testimony during the trial illuminated the major factual differences between Thurston’s and Harmon’s accounts of the night the incident took place. Thurston requested a self defense jury instruction based on his version of what had happened, which the trial court ultimately denied. …
Juror Assessment Of Certainty About Firearms Identification Evidence, Sarah L. Cooper, Paraic Scanlon
Juror Assessment Of Certainty About Firearms Identification Evidence, Sarah L. Cooper, Paraic Scanlon
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Hit Them Where It Hurts: State Responses To Biker Gangs In Canada, Graema Melcher
Hit Them Where It Hurts: State Responses To Biker Gangs In Canada, Graema Melcher
Dalhousie Law Journal
From civil and criminal forfeiture, to "gangsterism"offences in the Criminal Code, Canada does not lack for tools to address biker gangs. Yet attempts to stamp out bikers have met with little to no success. State responses to criminal organizations should use those organizations' own structures and symbols of power against them. A gang's reputation may be effectively used against a gang, but this strategy poses significant challenges to prosecution. Attempts to use a gang's internal hierarchy and administrative structure can succeed, but may only produce circumstantial findings if not supported by sufficient and substantial evidence. Attempts to combat gang violence …
Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky
Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky
Erwin Chemerinsky
No abstract provided.
Motion For Leave To File Amicus Curiae Brief And Brief For The National Association For Public Defense And Kentucky Association Of Criminal Defense Lawyers As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Sneed V. Burress (U.S. March 24, 2017) (No. 16-8047)., Janet Moore
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
No abstract provided.
Mass Suppression: Aggregation And The Fourth Amendment, Nirej Sekhon
Mass Suppression: Aggregation And The Fourth Amendment, Nirej Sekhon
Georgia Law Review
The FourthAmendment's exclusionary rule requires that
criminal courts suppress evidence obtained as a result of
an unconstitutionalsearch or seizure. The Supreme Court
has repeatedly stated that suppression is purely
regulatory, not remedial. Its only purpose is to deter
future police misconduct, not to remedy past privacy or
liberty harms suffered by the defendant. Exclusion, in
other words, is for the benefit of community members who
might, sometime in the future, be subject to police
misconduct like that endured by the defendant.
Exclusion's regulatory purpose would be greatly aided if
criminal courts could identify when a suppression motion
involved Fourth Amendment …
Richards Ii Takes A Bite Out Of Forensic Science, Michelle Cornell-Davis
Richards Ii Takes A Bite Out Of Forensic Science, Michelle Cornell-Davis
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Wrong Decision At The Wrong Time: Utah V. Strieff In The Era Of Aggressive Policing, Julian A. Cook
The Wrong Decision At The Wrong Time: Utah V. Strieff In The Era Of Aggressive Policing, Julian A. Cook
Scholarly Works
On June 20, 2016, the United States Supreme Court held in Utah v. Strieff that evidence discovered incident to an unconstitutional arrest of an individual should not be suppressed given that the subsequent discovery of an outstanding warrant attenuated the taint from the unlawful detention. Approximately two weeks later the issue of aggressive policing was again thrust into the national spotlight when two African-American individuals — Alton Sterling and Philando Castile — were killed by policemen in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and Falcon Heights, Minnesota, respectively, under questionable circumstances. Though connected by proximity in time, this article will demonstrate that these …
Notice And Standing In The Fourth Amendment: Searches Of Personal Data, Jennifer Daskal
Notice And Standing In The Fourth Amendment: Searches Of Personal Data, Jennifer Daskal
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
In at least two recent cases, courts have rejected service providers' capacity to raise Fourth Amendment claims on behalf of their customers. These holdings rely on longstanding Supreme Court doctrine establishing a general rule against third parties asserting the Fourth Amendment rights of others. However, there is a key difference between these two recent cases and those cases on which the doctrine rests. The relevant Supreme Court doctrine stems from situations in which someone could take action to raise the Fourth Amendment claim, even if the particular thirdparty litigant could not. In the situations presented by the recent cases, by …