Law Commons^™

A Revisionist Theory Of Abstention, Barry Friedman

Michigan Law Review

This article offers a straightforward model for identifying cases in which abstention threatens federal rights - and so is inappropriate and cases in which federal rights are not so threatened and state interests require abstention. Part I provides some background on the abstention doctrines, clarifying· the competing premises that must be reconciled in order to develop a coherent, unified abstention doctrine. Part II then sets out the basis for the revisionist theory and the manner in which it would operate, arguing that a federal trial forum only need be - and only should be - available where necessary to protect …

Icac And The Community, Mark Findlay

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Recently the language of 'community' has been widely used in the official discourse of criminal justice administration in Australia, in an obvious effort to legitimate new developments away from more traditional crime control. Commentators are now asking, why all this 'community speak' about policing, mediation, and corrections? As regards the 'community' perspective of anti-corruption initiatives, it is an attempt to transfer to the new institutions and processes some of the more positive implications which are assumed to flow from community allegiance.

The Right To Evidence, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Although its theoretical basis may be disputed, nobody questions the proposition that a person charged with a crime has a constitutional right to present a defense. Presenting a defense naturally requires access to proof. Access includes not only the availability of evidence, but also its permissible use. Consider some examples: A defendant wants to testify, but his lawyer's threats drive him off the stand. A witness who might be expected to give favorable testimony for the defense appears at trial but refuses to testify. A defense witness wants to testify, but because the defendant failed to notify the prosecutor about …

Gaining Access To The Jury: A Critical Guide To The Law Of Jury Selection In West Virginia, Part Two, Charles R. Disalvo

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Habeas Corpus Committee - Correspondence, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.

Habeas Corpus Committee

No abstract provided.

Foreword - The 'Truth In Criminal Justice' Series, Stephen J. Markman

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This special issue of the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform contains a series of reports-the 'Truth in Criminal Justice' series-that reexamine a variety of basic issues in the law of criminal procedure and evidence. In publishing this series, the editors of the Journal have made an important and timely contribution to the national debate over the character and future development of criminal justice in the United States. There is an abundance of legal writing on criminal justice issues, but relatively little of it concerns increasing the system's effectiveness in bringing criminals to justice or doing justice for the …

Preface, Journal Of Law Reform

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This compilation of articles confronted the Journal with some unusual decisions. In order to present the series accurately, we have retained the original style and source references rather than perform our usual editorial revisions. Thus we did not implement the standard stylistic conventions of the Journal, such as alternating masculine and feminine pronouns. The Foreword and Introduction, however, did receive comprehensive Journal editing, and any variations in style conventions and form were by the request of the authors.

Introduction - The Changed And Changing World Of Constitutional Criminal Procedure: The Contribution Of The Department Of Justice's Office Of Legal Policy, Joseph D. Grano

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The world of constitutional criminal procedure is changing slowly. Repudiating much of the thinking that led to the existing world, the changes are being driven by arguments that share common ground with those expressed in the Office of Legal Policy Reports. The unanswered question is whether tomorrow's changes will mirror the logical ramifications of this new way of thinking. What we cannot know today, as we ponder these Reports, is whether twenty years hence, as a new generation of law students begin to study our endeavors, the mistakes of the 1960s will be little more than "cold history." Whatever our …

The Law Of Pretrial Interrogation, Department Of Justice Office Of Legal Policy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The existing rules in the United States governing the questioning of suspects in custody are based on the Supreme Court's five to four decision in Miranda v. Arizona. The Court in Miranda promulgated a new, code-like set of rules for custodial questioning, including the creation of a right to counsel in connection with custodial questioning, a requirement of warnings, a prohibition of questioning unless the suspect affirmatively waives the rights set out in the warnings, and a prohibition of questioning if the suspect asks for a lawyer or indicates in any manner that he is unwilling to talk. These …

The Judiciary's Use Of Supervisory Power To Control Federal Law Enforcement Activity, Department Of Justice Office Of Legal Policy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In McNabb v. United States, the Supreme Court claimed- for the first time in its history-the prerogative of "establishing and maintaining civilized standards of procedure and evidence" in the exercise of "supervisory authority over the administration of criminal justice in the federal courts." Since then, the Court has used this self-declared oversight power on numerous occasions and for a wide variety of purposes, but it has never adequately explained either the provenance or the scope of this type of judicial authority. Lower federal courts have followed suit, on the largely unexamined assumption that they too are endowed with supervisory …

Double Jeopardy And G0vernment Appeals Of Acquittals, Department Of Justice Office Of Legal Policy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

As part of a continuing series of papers on impediments to the search for truth in criminal investigation and adjudication, the Office of Legal Policy has carried out a review of the law governing double jeopardy prohibitions on federal government appeals of criminal acquittals. These prohibitions undermine the search for truth in criminal adjudication by allowing some wrongly acquitted, culpable individuals to go unpunished. The results of our review are set out in this Report.

The Admission Of Criminal Histories At Trial, Department Of Justice Office Of Legal Policy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

As part of a continuing series of studies on impediments to the search for truth in criminal investigation and adjudication, the Office of Legal Policy has carried out a review of the law governing the admission of the criminal records of defendants and other persons at trial. The results of this review are set out in this Report.

The Sixth Amendment Right To Counsel Under The Massiah Line Of Cases, Department Of Justice Office Of Legal Policy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The sixth amendment guarantees to the accused in a criminal prosecution the right "to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." In Massiah v. United States, the Supreme Court held this right was violated when there was used against the defendant at trial evidence of incriminating statements deliberately elicited from him by an informant after he had been indicted and in the absence of counsel. In effect, this decision and others that 'followed have created a new constitutional right not to be questioned about pending charges prior to trial except in the presence of an attorney.

One consequence …

The Search And Seizure Exclusionary Rule, Department Of Justice Office Of Legal Policy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The fourth amendment guarantees the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." This guaranty is not self-executing, however, and the courts and criminal justice systems in this country have long been bedeviled by questions concerning appropriate methods of ensuring its observance. As a result of the Supreme Court's decisions in Weeks v. United States and Mapp v. Ohio, the method principally relied upon today is a judicially created rule excluding from criminal trials evidence obtained in violation of the defendant's fourth amendment rights.

The search and seizure …

Adverse Inferences From Silence, Department Of Justice Office Of Legal Policy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Report, the eighth in the Truth in Criminal Justice series, assesses the rules relating to the evidentiary consideration of the defendant's silence. Its general conclusion is that the existing restrictive rules in this area are unjustified impediments to the search for truth. The notion that the fifth amendment's prohibition of compelling a person in a criminal case to be a witness against himself bars drawing adverse inferences from the defendant's silence is not well-founded. In practical effect, these rules impede the conviction of the guilty by barring consideration of an aspect of the defendant's conduct-his failure to respond to …

Proof And Prejudice: A Constitutional Challenge To The Treatment Of Prejudicial Evidence In Federal Criminal Cases, D. Craig Lewis

Washington Law Review

The United States Supreme Court held its 1970 decision In re Winship that in criminal prosecutions the Constitution requires proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Professor Lewis argues that Winship governs the validity of evidence rules in criminal cases and requires that rules of evidence do not impair the reliability of criminal convictions. The author concludes that Federal Rule of Evidence 403, which permits the admission of prejudicial evidence unless the danger of unfair prejudice substantially outweighs probative value, violates this requirement. Rule 403 substantially increases the risk of erroneous decisionmaking and prescribes a balancing test that unconstitutionally places …

Police-Obtained Evidence And The Constitution: Distinguishing Unconstitutionally Obtained Evidence From Unconstitutionally Used Evidence, Arnold H. Loewy

Michigan Law Review

The article will consider four different types of police-obtained evidence: evidence obtained from an unconstitutional search and seizure, evidence obtained from a Miranda violation, confessions and lineup identifications obtained in violation of the sixth amendment right to counsel, and coerced confessions. My conclusions are that evidence obtained from an unconstitutional search and seizure is excluded because of the police misconduct by which it was obtained. On the other hand, evidence obtained from a Miranda violation is (or ought to be) excluded because use of that evidence compromises the defendant's procedural right not to be compelled to be a witness against …

Values, Ideology, And The Evolution Of The Adversary System, Ellen E. Sward

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure—"Drug Courier Profile" Characteristics Are Sufficient To Establish Reasonable Suspicion Of Criminal Conduct. United States V. Sokolow, Alec Farmer

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confusing The Fifth Amendment With The Sixth: Lower Court Misapplication Of The Innis Definition Of Interrogation, Jonathan L. Marks

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines how these courts have applied or misapplied Innis, and concludes that, while many of these decisions are consistent with Miranda and Innis, too many others are not. In order to evaluate these cases, it is first necessary to understand the meaning and significance of Innis. Part I thus considers Innis and its background. Part II then examines lower court decisions applying the Innis test, dividing these decisions into six groups based on the most common factual scenarios. Because the cases deal with factually specific police practices, this method constitutes the most useful way to …

Equal Protection In Enforcement Towards More Structured Discretion, Peter Finkle, Duncan Cameron

Dalhousie Law Journal

How often has it been said by administrators, politicians and members of the general public that a certain law is good, the problem is that it is not enforced?1 The very form of the question expresses the fact that for the general public and politicians alike, not to mention the legal profession, the law is usually thought of as that which is written in the books. In reality, however, that written law is only part of a much broader legal process which includes the decisions of those charged with the responsibility of enforcement and, indeed, the activities of judges and …

Use Of Force Against Terrorist Bases: Introduction, Malvina Halberstam

Articles

No abstract provided.

Sentencing Reform And Appellate Review, William W. Wilkins, Jr.

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Truth In Sentencing: Accepting Responsibility Under The United States Sentencing Guidelines, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

The United States Sentencing Guidelines (hereinafter Guidelines) allow federal district courts to reduce a defendant's sentence if the defendant "clearly demonstrates a recognition and affirmative acceptance of personal responsibility for his criminal conduct .... " In United States v. Perez-Franco, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that the above Guidelines section on acceptance of responsibility did not require a defendant to accept responsibility for charges that were to be dismissed as part of a plea agreement. The Perez-Franco decision is an affront to the fundamental principle that a defendant ought to take personal responsibility for …

Florida V. Riley, 109 S. Ct. 693 (1989), John R. Dixon

Florida State University Law Review

Criminal Procedure/Constitutional Law - WARRANTLESS AERIAL SURVEILLANCE AND THE OPEN VIEW DOCTRINE

Criminal Procedure, James P. Carey, Kevin J. Feeley

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Equivalent Deterrence: A Proposed Alternative To The Exclusionary Rule In Criminal Proceedings, Robert M. Hardaway

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

Perhaps no other area of American jurisprudence is as controversial as the exclusionary rule. Rejected by all other civilized countries2 and held in contempt by much of the American public, the rule reached its zenith during the Warren Court, only to be chipped away a little at a time by the Burger Court. Indeed, if the rule is ever to die, it seems destined to go out with a whimper rather than a bang. . .

Criminal Procedure - Presumed Guilty: The Use Of Videotaped And Closed-Circuit Televised Testimony In Child Sex Abuse Prosecutions And The Defendant's Right To Confrontation - Coy V. Iowa, Charles E. Wilson Jr.

Campbell Law Review

This Note proposes that those statutes which permit admission of videotaped testimony and most uses of closed-circuit televised testimony violate a criminal defendant's sixth amendment right to "confront his accusers." In Coy v. Iowa, the United States Supreme Court recently held that one state's practice of shielding the defendant from the view of the child witness during the child's testimony violated the defendant's right to confrontation. Following the Court's analysis, this Note discusses the various problems arising from the use of videotaped or closed-circuit televised testimony. Concluding that the admission of such testimony is not a constitutionally permissible substitute …

The Supreme Court And The Incredible Shrinking Fourth Amendment, Bruce G. Berner

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Killing Daddy: Developing A Self-Defense Strategy For The Abused Child, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.