Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Criminal Law--Rape--Cautionary Instruction In Sex Offense Trial Relating Prosecutrix's Credibility To The Nature Of The Crime Charged Is No Longer Mandatory; Discretionary Use Is Disapproved
Fordham Urban Law Journal
Defendant was convicted of rape, oral copulation, and attempted sodomy in Superior Court, Los Angeles County. The case against him rested predominantly on the testimony of his adult victim, partially corroborated as to identity by a scratch on defendant’s forehead, and further substantiated by defendant’s “if I did it I was drunk” admission to the police. The defendant appealed alleging error by the trial judge for failing to give a mandatory cautionary instruction. The California Supreme Court held that because the defendant was entitled to the cautionary instruction the trial judge had committed error in refusing to give it. Such …
The Doctrine Of Collateral Estoppel In Parole Revocation, Patrick M. Reilly
The Doctrine Of Collateral Estoppel In Parole Revocation, Patrick M. Reilly
Fordham Urban Law Journal
In recent years courts have shown more recognition of the rights of parolees and probationers. Spurred by a Supreme Court decision that certain due process protections were applicable to parole revocation procedures, revocation hearings are now providing parolees and probationers some of the procedural protections available to criminal defendants at trial. Policy considerations have dictated, however, that the protections available at revocation hearings must fall far short of conferring upon the accused "the full panoply of rights due a defendant" at trial. As a result of the Supreme Court's emphasis on the difference between revocation hearings and criminal proceedings, lower …
Speedy Trials: Recent Developments Concerning A Vital Right, Stephen F. Chepiga
Speedy Trials: Recent Developments Concerning A Vital Right, Stephen F. Chepiga
Fordham Urban Law Journal
Historically, Anglo-American law has jealously guarded the right of an accused to have a speedy trial in a criminal prosecution. It is extended to defendants in federal cases by the sixth amendment to the Constitution. Through incorporation into the fourteenth amendment, the protection is likewise available to defendants in state prosecutions. Notwithstanding constitutional provisions and Supreme Court decisions, the concept of a speedy trial has always been ambiguous. Until recent times it has been considered a matter that could only be defined in the context of the special circumstances of individual cases. The right was said to be “consistent with …