Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Police (5)
- United States Supreme Court (5)
- Prisons (3)
- Searches (3)
- Seizures (3)
-
- History (2)
- Identification (2)
- Interrogation (2)
- Michigan (2)
- Right to speedy trial (2)
- Sentencing (2)
- Admissibility (1)
- Burger Court (1)
- Colonial Era (1)
- Common law (1)
- Confessions (1)
- Crimina justice (1)
- Criminal justice (1)
- Custodial interrogations (1)
- Deception (1)
- Double Jeopardy (1)
- Double jeopardy (1)
- Eighth Amendment (1)
- Equality (1)
- Exclusionary rule (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Language (1)
- Law reform (1)
- Legal change (1)
- Lie detectors (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
From Pillory To Penitentiary: The Rise Of Criminal Incarceration In Early Massachusetts, Adam J. Hirsch
From Pillory To Penitentiary: The Rise Of Criminal Incarceration In Early Massachusetts, Adam J. Hirsch
Michigan Law Review
While the transition from the old forms of criminal sanction to incarceration was perhaps not, as Jeremy Bentham claimed, "one of the most signal improvements that have ever yet been made in our criminal legislation," one does not overstate to call it a signal development in the history of Anglo-American criminal justice - a development, one may add, that still wants adequate examination, much less explanation. This Article attempts to do both for one sample region: Massachusetts. Though the jurisprudential movement from pillory to penitentiary took place throughout the new American republic, as well as much of western Europe, our …
Relief For Prison Overcrowding: Evaluating Michigan's Accelerated Parole Statute, Frank T. Judge Iii
Relief For Prison Overcrowding: Evaluating Michigan's Accelerated Parole Statute, Frank T. Judge Iii
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Note describes and analyzes Michigan's Prison Overcrowding Emergency Powers Act. Part I reviews briefly current efforts to relieve prison overcrowding and concludes that traditional remedies are largely inadequate. Part II examines the early prisoner release statute and its implementation. Finally, Part III evaluates the statute's success in relieving prison overcrowding .
A Tremor In The Blood: Uses And Abuses Of The Lie Detector, Michigan Law Review
A Tremor In The Blood: Uses And Abuses Of The Lie Detector, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
A Review of A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector by David Thoreson Lykken
The Policy Dilemma: Federal Crime Policy And The Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Michigan Law Review
The Policy Dilemma: Federal Crime Policy And The Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
A Review of The Policy Dilemma: Federal Crime Policy and the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration by Malcolm M. Feeley and Austin D. Sarat
Salvaging Proportionate Prison Sentencing: A Reply To Rummel V. Estelle, Thomas F. Cavalier
Salvaging Proportionate Prison Sentencing: A Reply To Rummel V. Estelle, Thomas F. Cavalier
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Part I of this Note provides a capsule of the Court's holding in Rummel. Part II argues, contrary to Rummel, that precedential support can be mustered to support eighth amendment review of sentence length. Finally, part 11,1 discusses the continued viability of the proportionality test as a vehicle for assessing challenges to the length of imprisonment, and discounts the concerns voiced in Rummel regarding the difficulty of judicial review of legislative sentencing decisions.
A Dissent From The Miranda Dissents: Some Comments On The 'New' Fifth Amendment And The Old 'Voluntariness' Test, Yale Kamisar
A Dissent From The Miranda Dissents: Some Comments On The 'New' Fifth Amendment And The Old 'Voluntariness' Test, Yale Kamisar
Book Chapters
If the several conferences and workshops (and many lunch conversations) on police interrogation and confessions in which I have participated this past summer are any indication, Miranda v. Arizona has evoked much anger and spread much sorrow among judges, lawyers and professors. In the months and years ahead, such reaction is likely to be translated into microscopic analyses and relentless, probing criticism of the majority opinion. During this period of agonizing appraisal and reappraisal, I think it important that various assumptions and assertions in the dissenting opinions do not escape attention.
Criminal Procedure, The Burger Court, And The Legacy Of The Warren Court, Jerold H. Israel
Criminal Procedure, The Burger Court, And The Legacy Of The Warren Court, Jerold H. Israel
Book Chapters
During the 1960s, the Warren Court's decisions in the field of criminal procedure were strongly denounced by many prosecutors, police officers, and conservative politicians. Some of these critics were careful in their description of the Warren Court's record. Others let their strong opposition to several of the Court's more highly publicized decisions destroy their perception of the Court's work as a whole.
Search And Seizure Of America: The Case For Keeping The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
Search And Seizure Of America: The Case For Keeping The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Twenty years ago, concurring in Mapp v. Ohio (1961), Justice William 0. Douglas looked back on Wolf v. Colorado (1949) (which had held that the Fourth Amendment's substantive protection against "unreasonable search and seizure" was binding on the states through the due process clause, but that the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule was not) and recalled that the Wolf case had evoked "a storm of controversy which only today finds its end." But, of course, in the twenty years since Justice Douglas made that observation the storm of controversy has only intensified, and it has engulfed the exclusionary rule in federal …
On Recognizing Variations In State Criminal Procedure, Jerold H. Israel
On Recognizing Variations In State Criminal Procedure, Jerold H. Israel
Articles
Everyone recognizes that the laws governing criminal procedure vary somewhat from state to state. There is often a tendency, however, to underestimate the degree of diversity that exists. Even some of the most experienced practitioners believe that aside from variations on some minor matters, such as the number of peremptory challenges granted, and variation on a few major items, such as the use of the grand jury, the basic legal standards governing most procedures are approximately the same in a large majority of states. I have seen varied evidence of this misconception in practitioner discussions of law reform proposals, particularly …