Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- APA (1)
- American Psychiatric Association (1)
- Davis v. Alaska (1)
- Doe v. United States (1)
- Evans v. Commonwealth (1)
-
- Final Reportof the Task Forceon the Insanity Defense (1)
- General Assembly (1)
- Godfrey v. Georgia (1)
- Gregg v. Georgia (1)
- Jurek v. Texas (1)
- Martin v. Commonwealth (1)
- Miranda v. Arizona (1)
- New York v. Quarles (1)
- Quintana v. Commonwealth (1)
- Smith v. Illinois (1)
- State v. DeLawder (1)
- State v. Jalo (1)
- Winfield v. Commonwealth (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Virginia's Capital Murder Sentencing Proceeding: A Defense Perspective, Alan W. Clarke
Virginia's Capital Murder Sentencing Proceeding: A Defense Perspective, Alan W. Clarke
University of Richmond Law Review
Capital murder trials present a unique challenge to defense counsel. Many capital defendants are demonstrably guilty of heinous crimes, and a single-minded defense concentrating solely on acquittal in the face of overwhelming evidence of guilt will often alienate the jury. The lawyer who focuses entirely on the guilt stage without attending to the sentencing stage may be consigning his client to the electric chair. This article deals with the sentencing phase of a capital murder trial, where life imprisonment, the jury's only alternative to the death penalty, represents a victory for the defense.
Winfield V. Commonwealth: The Application Of The Virginia Rape Shield Statute, Philip L. Hatchett
Winfield V. Commonwealth: The Application Of The Virginia Rape Shield Statute, Philip L. Hatchett
University of Richmond Law Review
In Winfield v. Commonwealth, the Virginia Supreme Court held that the state's recently enacted rape shield statute could not restrict or infringe upon the defendant's sixth amendment right under the United States Constitution to confront his accusers. In overruling the trial judge, the court stated that section 18.2-67.7 of the Code of Virginia actually expanded the admissibility of evidence related to specific prior sexual conduct of the prosecutrix. By this ruling, Virginia has joined a minority of jurisdictions which have refused to recognize the special dilemma of the prosecutrix in a rape trial and to grant additional protections under her …
New York V. Quarles:The "Public Safety" Exception To Miranda, John Randolph Bode
New York V. Quarles:The "Public Safety" Exception To Miranda, John Randolph Bode
University of Richmond Law Review
In New York v. Quarles, the Supreme Court attempted to limit the exclusionary sanction provided under Miranda v. Arizona. Quarles is a significant decision in the criminal procedure area not only because of the exception which it establishes, but because it represents "a legitimate effort by the Burger Court to reconcile the realities of effective law enforcement with the often hyper technical rules of criminal justice." Many observers have interpreted the Quarles decision as the long-awaited fruition of the conservatism now presiding over the Burger Court. However, the setting for Quarles can be traced back to the Miranda decision itself.