Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- CJP (1)
- Capital Jury Project (1)
- Capital punishment (1)
- Charles Weisselberg (1)
- Cornell Death Penalty Project (1)
-
- District judges (1)
- Drug prosecutions (1)
- Empirical legal studies (1)
- Executive clemency (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Federal drug sentences (1)
- Federal sentencing guidelines (1)
- Fifth amendment (1)
- Garrity v. New Jersey (1)
- Katz v. United States (1)
- Knowing exposure (1)
- Manifestly untrue testimony (1)
- Miranda exclusionary rule (1)
- Miranda rights (1)
- Miranda rules (1)
- Miranda v. Arizona (1)
- Narcotics violations (1)
- Physically impossible testimony (1)
- Police conduct (1)
- Police credibility (1)
- Police testimony (1)
- Proportionality review (1)
- Public safety exception (1)
- Reasonable expectation of privacy (1)
- Scottsboro trials (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Are Police Free To Disregard Miranda?, Steven D. Clymer
Are Police Free To Disregard Miranda?, Steven D. Clymer
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
Tailored Police Testimony At Suppression Hearings, Joel Atlas
Tailored Police Testimony At Suppression Hearings, Joel Atlas
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
Whether a court must suppress evidence typically turns on the conduct or observations of the police officer who discovered the evidence. By falsely testifying to the facts surrounding the discovery of the evidence, a police officer may validate a blatantly unconstitutional search. New York courts have long recognized that police officers sometimes fabricate suppression testimony to meet constitutional restrictions. Indeed, the Appellate Division has rejected police testimony at suppression hearings where the officer’s testimony appears to have been “patently tailored to nullify constitutional objections.” Although, to be sure, rejections are rare and their number appears to be declining, the appellate …
What Is A Search? Two Conceptual Flaws In Fourth Amendment Doctine And Some Hints Of A Remedy, Sherry F. Colb
What Is A Search? Two Conceptual Flaws In Fourth Amendment Doctine And Some Hints Of A Remedy, Sherry F. Colb
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Quiet Rebellion Ii: An Empirical Analysis Of Declining Federal Drug Sentences Including Data From The District Level, Frank O. Bowman, Michael Heise
Quiet Rebellion Ii: An Empirical Analysis Of Declining Federal Drug Sentences Including Data From The District Level, Frank O. Bowman, Michael Heise
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
This is the second of two articles in which we seek an explanation for the hitherto unexamined fact that the average length of prison sentences imposed in federal court for narcotics violations declined by more than 15% between 1991-92 and 2000.
Our first article, Quiet Rebellion? Explaining Nearly a Decade of Declining Federal Drug Sentences, 86 Iowa Law Review 1043 (May 2001) ( "Rebellion I" ), examined national sentencing data in an effort to determine whether the decline in federal drug sentences is real (rather than a statistical anomaly), and to identify and analyze possible causes of the decline. We …
The Scottsboro Trials: A Legal Lynching, Faust Rossi
The Scottsboro Trials: A Legal Lynching, Faust Rossi
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Twenty-Five Years Of Death: A Report Of The Cornell Death Penalty Project On The "Modern" Era Of Capital Punishment In South Carolina, John H. Blume
Twenty-Five Years Of Death: A Report Of The Cornell Death Penalty Project On The "Modern" Era Of Capital Punishment In South Carolina, John H. Blume
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
In 1972, the United States Supreme Court determined that the death penalty, as then administered in this country, violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Many states, including South Carolina, scurried to enact new, "improved" capital punishment statutes which would satisfy the Supreme Court's rather vague mandate. In 1976, the High Court approved some of the new laws, and the American death penalty was back in business. After a wrong turn or two, including a statutory scheme which did not pass constitutional muster, the South Carolina General Assembly passed the current death penalty statute in 1977. The …