Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Criminal Procedure

1984

Institution
Keyword
Publication
Publication Type

Articles 61 - 72 of 72

Full-Text Articles in Law

Timing Under A Unified Wealth Transfer Tax, Theodore S. Sims Jan 1984

Timing Under A Unified Wealth Transfer Tax, Theodore S. Sims

Faculty Scholarship

The United States taxes gifts made while an individual is living more leniently than it taxes wealth transfers at death. Although in some measure this disparity has existed since the enactment of the modern estate and gift taxes in 1916 and 1932, it was significantly narrowed by the Tax Reform Act of 1976 (the 1976 Act). That statute replaced the separate gift and estate taxes with a regime that taxes the cumulative total of an individual's lifetime taxable gifts and his taxable estate at death, under a single (or "unified") graduated table of rates. Nevertheless, there remains a signficant difference …


Judge Friendly's Contributions To Securities Law And Criminal Procedure: "Moderation Is All", Frank Goodman Jan 1984

Judge Friendly's Contributions To Securities Law And Criminal Procedure: "Moderation Is All", Frank Goodman

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


On Complaining About The Burger Court, Robert F. Nagel Jan 1984

On Complaining About The Burger Court, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.


Imputed Criminal Liability, Paul H. Robinson Jan 1984

Imputed Criminal Liability, Paul H. Robinson

All Faculty Scholarship

Typically, the set of elements defining a crime comprise what may be called the paradigm of liability for that offense: An actor is criminally liable if and only if the state proves all these elements. The paradigm of an offense, however, does not always determine criminal liability. Even where all the elements of the paradigm are proven, rules and doctrines create exceptions that affect criminal liability. Some exceptions, such as insanity, duress, and law enforcement authority, can exculpate an actor even though his conduct and state of mind satisfy the paradigm for the offense charged. Such exculpating exceptions are grouped …


Criminal Procedure - Removing The Third Option From The Jury - State V. Strickland, Lisa Boutelle Hardin Jan 1984

Criminal Procedure - Removing The Third Option From The Jury - State V. Strickland, Lisa Boutelle Hardin

Campbell Law Review

Prior to the North Carolina Supreme Court's holding in State v. Strickland, the rule governing second degree murder jury instructions in a first degree murder case was clear. In all murder cases in which the prosecution relied on the elements of premeditation and deliberation to prove that first degree murder had been committed, the trial judge was required to submit the issue of second degree murder to the jury. This rule came from the Court's unanimous decision in State v. Harris. The Court adhered to this rule in several later cases until it heard Strickland in 1983. Apparently …


Criminal Procedure - The Role Of The Search Warrant In Fire Investigations - Michigan V. Clifford, Samuel A. Mann Jan 1984

Criminal Procedure - The Role Of The Search Warrant In Fire Investigations - Michigan V. Clifford, Samuel A. Mann

Campbell Law Review

This note will attempt to determine whether the Court was successful in clarifying the doubt concerning the application of the precepts stated in Tyler, or whether the Court may have sown new seeds of confusion in this area.


Right Against Self-Incrimination -- "Public Safety" Exception, David C. Williams Jan 1984

Right Against Self-Incrimination -- "Public Safety" Exception, David C. Williams

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.


Some Unwise Reflections About Discretion, George P. Fletcher Jan 1984

Some Unwise Reflections About Discretion, George P. Fletcher

Faculty Scholarship

In listening to discussions about discretion in the criminal process, one has the sense of sharply cut distinctions slipping toward a black hole in our language. All decisions by police, prosecutors, judges and jury are routinely called discretionary. This usage pervades respectable, basically sound papers. In a recent article in the Yale Law Journal, Goldstein and Marcus seek to demonstrate that discretion pervades the decisions of French, German and Italian prosecutors. They write: "Claims that prosecutorial discretion has been eliminated, or is supervised closely, are exaggerated. Discretion is exercised in each of the systems [French, German and Italian] for …


Criminal Procedure - Vessels In Inland Waters Are Subject To Suspicionless Boarding - United States V. Villamonte-Marquez, Wallace R. Young Jr. Jan 1984

Criminal Procedure - Vessels In Inland Waters Are Subject To Suspicionless Boarding - United States V. Villamonte-Marquez, Wallace R. Young Jr.

Campbell Law Review

The purpose of this Note is to examine the fourth amendment implications of the holding in Villamonte-Marquez. The Note will examine the Court's treatment of Section 1581(a) under which the search arose, analyze the judicial treatment of the decisions relied on by the Court and criticize the Court's treatment of the "reasonableness" of the governmental intrusion. The Note concludes that because private cabin-boaters have great interests against arbitrary intrusion by officials, cases such as Villamonte-Marquez should be scrutinized more carefully to preserve the protection of the fourth amendment.


Criminal Procedure - Edwards V. Arizona Is Alive But Not Well In North Carolina - State V. Franklin, John Lloyd Coble Jan 1984

Criminal Procedure - Edwards V. Arizona Is Alive But Not Well In North Carolina - State V. Franklin, John Lloyd Coble

Campbell Law Review

The purpose of this note is to analyze the North Carolina Supreme Court's decision in State v. Franklin, in light of the United States Supreme Court's Edwards rule, to show how the North Carolina court deviated from the rule and failed to exclude from trial evidence obtained in violation of defendant's constitutionally protected rights.


Criminal Procedure - Oliver And The Open Fields Doctrine - Oliver V. United States, T. Michael Godley Jan 1984

Criminal Procedure - Oliver And The Open Fields Doctrine - Oliver V. United States, T. Michael Godley

Campbell Law Review

In examining the vitality of the open fields doctrine, this note will consider the development of the doctrine, the controversy caused by the Katz v. United States opinion, and the Oliver decision itself. Weaknesses in the majority's analysis will be discussed and alternative approaches will be given. According to the Supreme Court in Oliver, open fields are not entitled to fourth amendment protections, nor are expectations of privacy within those fields deemed reasonable.


Admissibility Of Prior-Action Depositions And Formertestimony Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(A)(4) Andfed. R. Evid. 804(B)(1): Courts Differinginterpretations, J. Randall Coffey Jan 1984

Admissibility Of Prior-Action Depositions And Formertestimony Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(A)(4) Andfed. R. Evid. 804(B)(1): Courts Differinginterpretations, J. Randall Coffey

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.