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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 9 of 9

Full-Text Articles in Law

Can The West Learn From The Rest?' The Chinese Legal Order's Hybrid Modernity, Nicholas C. Howson Jan 2009

Can The West Learn From The Rest?' The Chinese Legal Order's Hybrid Modernity, Nicholas C. Howson

Other Publications

I am asked to present on the "shortcomings of the Western model of legality based on a professionalized, individualistic and highly formalistic approach to justice" as a way to understanding if "the West can develop today a form of legality which is relational rather than based on litigation as a zero sum game, learning from face to face social organizations in which individuals understand the law" - presumably in the context of the imperial and modem Chinese legal systems which I know best as a scholar and have lived for many years as a resident of the modem identity of the ...


Florida V. Bostick, Yale Kamisar Jan 2009

Florida V. Bostick, Yale Kamisar

Other Publications

501 U.S. 429 (1991), argued 26 Feb. 1991, decided 20 June 1991 by vote of 6 to 3; O’Connor for the Court, Marshall in dissent. What constitutes a “seizure” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment? Police practices need not be “reasonable”—indeed, are not regulated by the Fourth Amendment at all—unless they are considered “searches” or “seizures.” In this case, which involved a growing antidrug police tactic known as “working the buses” (randomly approaching a bus passenger and asking him for identification and to grant permission to search his luggage), the Court took a narrow view ...


Mallory V. United States, Yale Kamisar Jan 2009

Mallory V. United States, Yale Kamisar

Other Publications

354 U.S. 449 (1957), argued 1 Apr. 1957, decided 24 June 1957 by vote of 9 to 0; Frankfurter for the Court. Although the power of the Supreme Court to overturn state convictions is limited to the enforcement of Fourteenth Amendment due process rights, the Court may formulate rules of evidence in the exercise of its “supervisory power” over the administration of federal criminal justice that go well beyond due process requirements. The best-known example is the McNabb-Mallory rule.


California V. Acevedo, Yale Kamisar Jan 2009

California V. Acevedo, Yale Kamisar

Other Publications

500 U.S. 565 (1991), argued 8 Jan. 1991, decided 30 May 1991 by vote of 6 to 3; Blackmun for the Court, Scalia concurring, Stevens in dissent. Until the 1991 Acevedo case was decided, two different rules governed the search of closed containers found in a motor vehicle. In United States v. Ross (1982), the Court held that if the police had probable cause to search an entire vehicle for contraband and came upon a closed container in the course of the automobile search, they could open the container without first obtaining a warrant. On the other hand, in ...


Report On The 2007-2008 Csale Survey Of Applied Legal Educators, David A. Santacroce, Robert R. Kuehn Jan 2009

Report On The 2007-2008 Csale Survey Of Applied Legal Educators, David A. Santacroce, Robert R. Kuehn

Other Publications

This report tabulates the results of the 2007-08 Center for the Study of Applied Legal Education (CSALE) Survey of Applied Legal Education. The results provide valuable insight into the state and nature of applied legal education in areas including program design and structure, pedagogical techniques and practices, common program challenges, and the treatment of applied legal educators in the legal academy. And because the Survey will be repeated every three years, the results reported herein provide the "baseline" for examining the growth and development of applied legal education going forward.


The Truth About Torts: Rethinking Regulatory Preemption And Its Impact On Public Health, William Buzbee, William Funk, Thomas Mcgarity, Nina A. Mendelson, Sidney Shapiro, David Vladeck, Matthew Shudtz Jan 2009

The Truth About Torts: Rethinking Regulatory Preemption And Its Impact On Public Health, William Buzbee, William Funk, Thomas Mcgarity, Nina A. Mendelson, Sidney Shapiro, David Vladeck, Matthew Shudtz

Other Publications

As consumers, we assume that the automobiles, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and other products we purchase are generally safe for their intended uses. We rely on manufacturers to design and produce safe products, and we assume that federal regulators are conscientious watchdogs of the marketplace. In most instances, our assumptions are valid and we safely go about our lives. But the regulatory system is now frayed to the point that dangerous products sometimes slip through the cracks. Vioxx, Firestone/ATX tires, and toxics-laden children’s toys have endangered and harmed millions. In these cases, society depends on the state courts as ...


Escobedo V. Illinois, Yale Kamisar Jan 2009

Escobedo V. Illinois, Yale Kamisar

Other Publications

378 U.S. 438 (1964), argued 29 Apr. 1964, decided 22 June 1964 by vote of 5 to 4; Goldberg for the Court, Harlan, Stewart, White, and Clark in dissent. When Danny Escobedo, a murder suspect, was taken to the police station and put in an interrogation room, he repeatedly asked to speak to the lawyer he had retained. Escobedo's lawyer soon arrived at the station house and repeatedly asked to see his client. Despite the persistent efforts of both Escobedo and his lawyer, the police prevented them from meeting. The police also failed to advise Escobedo of his ...


Massiah V. United States, Yale Kamisar Jan 2009

Massiah V. United States, Yale Kamisar

Other Publications

377 U.S. 201 (1964), argued 3 Mar. 1964, decided 18 May 1964 by vote of 6 to 3; Stewart for the Court, White in dissent. Massiah was decided at a time when the Warren Court's “revolution in American criminal procedure” was accelerating. According to Massiah, after the initiation of adversary judicial proceedings (by indictment, as in Massiah's case, or by information, preliminary hearing or arraignment), the Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to rely on counsel as the “medium” between himself and the government. Thus, once adversary proceedings have begun, the government cannot bypass the defendant ...


Miranda V. Arizona, Yale Kamisar Jan 2009

Miranda V. Arizona, Yale Kamisar

Other Publications

384 U.S. 436 (1966), argued 28 Feb. 1966, decided 13 June 1966 by vote of 5 to 4; Warren for the Court, Clark, Harlan, White, and Stewart in dissent. The Warren Court's revolution in American criminal procedure reached its high point (or, depending upon one's perspective, its low point) on 13 June 1966. That day the Court handed down its opinion in Miranda, the most famous, and most bitterly criticized, confession case in the nation's history. To some, Miranda symbolized the legal system's determination to treat even the lowliest and most despicable criminal suspect with ...