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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 10 of 10

Full-Text Articles in Law

0n Executing Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenics: Identity And The Construction Of “Synthetic” Competency, Theodore Y. Blumoff Feb 2015

0n Executing Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenics: Identity And The Construction Of “Synthetic” Competency, Theodore Y. Blumoff

Theodore Y. Blumoff

Since 2003, death penalty jurisdictions have been permitted to use psychotropic drugs to “restore” the competency of schizophrenics so they can execute them. Exactly why it is permissible to execute a “synthetically” or “artificially” competent individual is unclear in light of Ford v. Wainwright, a 1986 decision in which the United States Supreme Court, following ancient custom and common law rule, held that the cruel and unusual prohibition of the Eighth Amendment prohibited execution of the insane. The lack of clarity follows from the inability of the Court to agree on the reason the tradition persists. Nonetheless, health care providers …


Co-Occurring Substance Use Disorder And Mental Illness In Criminal Offenders, Jayme M. Reisler Jan 2015

Co-Occurring Substance Use Disorder And Mental Illness In Criminal Offenders, Jayme M. Reisler

Jayme M Reisler

The high rate of comorbid substance use disorder and other mental illness (“dual diagnosis”) poses an enormous obstacle to public policy and sentencing in criminal cases. It is estimated that almost half of all Federal, State, and jail inmates suffer from dual diagnosis – a significantly higher prevalence than in the general population. Yet such inmates lack access to proper and effective treatments for their conditions. Several etiological theories have been put forth to explain the occurrence of dual diagnosis in general. However, virtually no studies have explored possible etiological reasons for the higher prevalence of dual diagnosis specifically in …


Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma E. Marouf Aug 2014

Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma E. Marouf

Fatma E Marouf

This Article challenges the constitutionality of indiscriminately restraining civil immigration detainees during removal proceedings. Not only are immigration detainees routinely placed in handcuffs, leg irons, and belly chains without any individualized determination of the need for restraints, but Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the prosecuting party, makes the decisions about the use of restraints, rather than the judge. After examining the rationale for the well-established prohibition against the indiscriminate use of restraints during criminal and civil jury trials, and discussing how some courts have extended this rationale to bench trials, this Article contends that ICE’s practice violates substantive and procedural …


Unreasonable Doubt: Warren Hill, Aedpa, And Georgia’S Unconstitutional Burden Of Proof, Adam Lamparello Mar 2014

Unreasonable Doubt: Warren Hill, Aedpa, And Georgia’S Unconstitutional Burden Of Proof, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

No abstract provided.


Rationality, Insanity, And The Insanity Defense: Reflections On The Limits Of Reason, Theodore Y. Blumoff Mar 2014

Rationality, Insanity, And The Insanity Defense: Reflections On The Limits Of Reason, Theodore Y. Blumoff

Theodore Y. Blumoff

Individuals who suffer from chronic paranoid ideations live with deeply embedded conspiratorial delusions that are sometimes accompanied by unwanted visual and/or auditory stimuli, sometime neither: just psychotic delusions in which they feel as if they have lost control of their lives – and of course they have, albeit not from the performances of foreign forces. When those perceived forces persevere for even a fairly short period of time, they can dictate the performance of evil deeds that the individual ultimately feels helpless to oppose. What observations and findings from neuroscience make clear is that such individuals do not lack knowledge, …


The Evolution Of The Digital Millennium Copyright Act; Changing Interpretations Of The Dmca And Future Implications For Copyright Holders, Hillary A. Henderson Jan 2014

The Evolution Of The Digital Millennium Copyright Act; Changing Interpretations Of The Dmca And Future Implications For Copyright Holders, Hillary A. Henderson

Hillary A Henderson

Copyright law rewards an artificial monopoly to individual authors for their creations. This reward is based on the belief that, by granting authors the exclusive right to reproduce their works, they receive an incentive and means to create, which in turn advances the welfare of the general public by “promoting the progress of science and useful arts.” Copyright protection subsists . . . in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or …


Beyond Finality: How Making Criminal Judgments Less Final Can Further The Interests Of Finality, Andrew Chongseh Kim Oct 2013

Beyond Finality: How Making Criminal Judgments Less Final Can Further The Interests Of Finality, Andrew Chongseh Kim

Andrew Chongseh Kim

Courts and scholars commonly assume that granting convicted defendants more liberal rights to challenge their judgments would harm society’s interests in “finality.” According to conventional wisdom, finality in criminal judgments is necessary to conserve resources, encourage efficient behavior by defense counsel, and deter crime. Thus, under the common analysis, the extent to which convicted defendants should be allowed to challenge their judgments depends on how much society is willing to sacrifice to validate defendants’ rights. This Article argues that expanding defendants’ rights on post-conviction review does not always harm these interests. Rather, more liberal review can often conserve state resources, …


The Dangerousness Of The Status Quo: A Case For Modernizing Civil Commitment Law, Daniel A. Moon Aug 2013

The Dangerousness Of The Status Quo: A Case For Modernizing Civil Commitment Law, Daniel A. Moon

Daniel C Moon

The states, private healthcare organizations, and those with psychiatric disorders are poorly served by the vague “dangerousness” standard endorsed by the United States Supreme Court in O’Connor v. Donaldson, as well as the state statutes that adhere to the high bar set in its holding. This paper explores involuntary civil commitment from a variety of perspectives in order to highlight these issues and to identify where improvements can be made. Specifically, this article proposes that the American Law Institute or the American Bar Association promulgate model rules intended to correct the system’s shortcomings and protect the various interested parties.


Timeless Trial Strategies And Tactics: Lessons From The Classic Claus Von Bülow Case, Daniel M. Braun Feb 2013

Timeless Trial Strategies And Tactics: Lessons From The Classic Claus Von Bülow Case, Daniel M. Braun

Daniel M Braun

In this new Millennium -- an era of increasingly complex cases -- it is critical that lawyers keep a keen eye on trial strategy and tactics. Although scientific evidence today is more sophisticated than ever, the art of effectively engaging people and personalities remains prime. Scientific data must be contextualized and presented in absorbable ways, and attorneys need to ensure not only that they correctly understand jurors, judges, witnesses, and accused persons, but also that they find the means to make their arguments truly resonate if they are to formulate an effective case and ultimately realize justice. A decades-old case …


An Attack On Self-Defense, Reid G. Fontaine Jan 2009

An Attack On Self-Defense, Reid G. Fontaine

Reid G. Fontaine

Debate about the distinction between justification and excuse in criminal law theory has been lively during the last thirty years. Questions as to the nature and structure of various affirmative defenses continue to be raised, and the doctrine of self-defense has been at the center of much discussion. Three main articulations have been advanced: a purely objective theory, a purely subjective theory, and an objective/subjective hybrid. In the present Article, I support a hybrid model and propose a three-requirement framework that delineates the criteria that must be met to satisfy self-defense as a legitimate justification. Because this three-requirement framework raises …