Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Criminal (16)
- Virginia (16)
- Execution (15)
- Punishment (14)
- Capital (12)
-
- Death (11)
- Sentencing (10)
- Supreme Court (10)
- Annual Survey of Virginia Law (9)
- Evidence (9)
- Jury (9)
- Penalty (9)
- Furman v. Georgia (8)
- Johnson v. Commonwealth (8)
- Criminal law (7)
- Drug (7)
- Miranda v. Arizona (7)
- Trial (7)
- Witness (7)
- Death penalty (6)
- Defense (6)
- Double jeopardy (6)
- Juvenile (6)
- Lethal (6)
- Plea (6)
- Procedure (6)
- Race (6)
- Williams v. Commonwealth (6)
- Appeal (5)
- Counsel (5)
Articles 181 - 210 of 210
Full-Text Articles in Law
Sentencing In Criminal Cases: How Great The Need For Reform?, Anthony P. Giorno
Sentencing In Criminal Cases: How Great The Need For Reform?, Anthony P. Giorno
University of Richmond Law Review
For many years, the sentencing process of the criminal justice system sought to achieve four goals: deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation of the offender, and retribution for society and the victim. The achievement of these goals was implemented in the majority of jurisdictions through imposition of an indeterminate sentence and discretionary release by an administrative body-traditionally a parole board. This approach allowed courts to announce relatively long sentences as a deterrent to future criminal behavior and to placate the victim and society, but tempered the punishment by allowing early release on an individual basis as soon as the offender had been rehabilitated.
Barring Slayers' Acquisition Of Property Rights In Virginia: A Proposed Statute, Sandra Gross Schneider
Barring Slayers' Acquisition Of Property Rights In Virginia: A Proposed Statute, Sandra Gross Schneider
University of Richmond Law Review
The above passage by Justice Benjamin Cardozo clearly reflects the age-old maxim of the common law, Nullus commodurn caperepotest de injuria sua propria, which expounds the philosophy that no individual shall profit from his own wrong. The present Virginia statute concerning homicide and succession to property was enacted by the legislature to reflect this common law policy. However, because of the very narrow scope of the statute and the requirement that it be strictly construed, it is presently inadequate to respond to many of the issues facing our judges in Virginia. Section 64.1-18 of the Virginia Code states that no …
Prison Inmate Marriages: A Survey And A Proposal, Jackson M. Bruce, John M. Claytor, Herman C. Daniel Iii
Prison Inmate Marriages: A Survey And A Proposal, Jackson M. Bruce, John M. Claytor, Herman C. Daniel Iii
University of Richmond Law Review
This comment explores one facet of the issue of inmate civil rights: the right to marry. An analysis will be made of the current situation nationwide with particular emphasis on Virginia, including proposed guidelines for Virginia's Department of Corrections that reflect the current national trend with regard to inmate marriages.
Criminal Law-Victims' Rights-Virginia Adopts Statute To Compensate The Victims Of Crime, Charles W. Hazelwood Jr.
Criminal Law-Victims' Rights-Virginia Adopts Statute To Compensate The Victims Of Crime, Charles W. Hazelwood Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
Concern for the victims of crime has increased in recent years. The enactment by the Virginia General Assembly of a statute to compensate victims of crime reflected this concern. The General Assembly, "as a matter of moral responsibility," decided to aid victims of crime who suffer disability and financial hardship. Underlying Virginia's passage of a victim compensation statute was the recognition that civil remedies against the criminal offender generally have been unsuccessful.
Criminal Law-Federal System Adopts Specific Parameters For The Constitutional Right To A Speedy Trial
University of Richmond Law Review
The right of every criminal defendant to a speedy trial is deeply entrenched in our legal heritage and is specifically included in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution. However, though the guarantee of a speedy trial is quite explicit, the courts generally have been confused as to the precise extent of this right. Indeed, the Supreme Court did not expressly recognize the right as fundamental until 1967, and until 1972 had provided no guidelines for determining whether a defendant had been denied the right to a speedy trial. The Court at that time refused to set specific …
Has The Burger Court Dealt A Death Blow To The Presumption Of Malice In Virginia?
Has The Burger Court Dealt A Death Blow To The Presumption Of Malice In Virginia?
University of Richmond Law Review
While presumptions and burdens of proof have generally eluded effective analysis, the presumption of malice has almost defied it. Notwithstanding a common law origin and the significance that instructions of the presumption of malice have played in many murder trials in Virginia, the presumption has constantly been under attack. This comment will explore the meaning of the presumption of malice and determine whether Virginia's approach violates the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment in light of the recent Supreme Court decision of Mullaney v. Wilbur.
Capital Punishment: Constitutional Parameters For The Ultimate Penalty, James F. Stutts
Capital Punishment: Constitutional Parameters For The Ultimate Penalty, James F. Stutts
University of Richmond Law Review
Four years after Furmanv. Georgia, the Supreme Court has resolved the major question left unanswered by that decision - does capital punishment per se constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the eighth amendment? The Court also announced the statutory standards which satisfy Furman's requirement that the death penalty not be imposed arbitrarily or capriciously. By a 7-2 vote, the Court held that the imposition of the death penalty for murder did not per se constitute cruel and unusual punishment. By the same vote, the Court upheld the capital sentencing statutes of Georgia, Florida and Texas, noting that arbitrary …
Proposed Legislation- Criminal Law-Proposed Revisions Of Title 18.1- Designation Of Punishment And Capital Punishment (Senate Bill No. 56)
University of Richmond Law Review
The Virginia General Assembly, during a Special Session in 1971, directed the Virginia Code Commission to revise Title 18.1, Crimes and Offenses Generally, of the Code of Virginia. Senate Bill No. 562 was adopted in essentially the same form as the Code Commission's revisions, however, due to the lack of time, the bill was carried over until the next session. This article will analyze several areas contained in Senate Bill No. 56: Designation of Punishment and Capital Punishment.
Criminal Law-Evidence--Confession To Polygraph Operator Prior To Actual Test Held Admissible
Criminal Law-Evidence--Confession To Polygraph Operator Prior To Actual Test Held Admissible
University of Richmond Law Review
Rules of evidence governing the admissibility of confessions have devel- oped gradually throughout the history of Anglo-American jurisprudence. Initially any confession was admissible regardless of the methods by which it was obtained. The basic consideration was that the evidence admitted be truthful and reliable. To protect the integrity of judicial proceedings, safeguards were later developed to insure the reliability of confessions by a determination of the voluntariness with which they were given. Courts have struggled with the problem of formulating a workable definition of voluntariness and have not yet developed a uniform substantive test.
Revision Of Virginia's Criminal Code
Revision Of Virginia's Criminal Code
University of Richmond Law Review
On October 1, 1975 the criminal justice system of the Commonwealth of Virginia began to operate under revised codes of criminal law and procedure. Enacted during the last legislative session, Titles 18.2 and 19.2 contain an impressive array of new laws with which judges, lawyers, and law enforcement officers should quickly become familiar. In many instances, these new laws go far beyond recodification of existing laws. Several represent substantive changes which are quite controversial and remain hotly debated since the close of the legislative session.
Search And Seizure- Knowledge Of Fourth Amendment Rights Not A Prerequisite To A Valid Consent Search
University of Richmond Law Review
The fourth amendment to the United States Constitution, applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment, guarantees to every citizen the indefeasible right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures. As a response to a long history of English colonial abuses, the fourth amendment was intended by the drafters of the Bill of Rights to be a safeguard against governmental misuse of the writs of assistance' and the general warrant. The Supreme Court has broadly interpreted the constitutional mandate of the fourth amendment as proscribing all searches and seizures which do not comply with its stringent provisions. However, certain …
Recidivism: The Treatment Of The Habitual Offender
Recidivism: The Treatment Of The Habitual Offender
University of Richmond Law Review
Penal law and theory generally "addresses itself to two types of criminals: first offenders and habitual offenders or recidivists. Those in the latter group have been referred to as failures for two reasons: first, they have failed to alter their previous behavior and make an adequate adjustment upon returning to society; second, society has failed with them in terms of its efforts at correction, treatment, and rehabilitation. The traditional method of dealing with the recidivist has been to increase the punishment "increasing the dosage of a medicine which failed to cure when administered in small quantities." Indeed, upon conviction for …
The Defendant In Jeopardy- Is Virginia Unique?
The Defendant In Jeopardy- Is Virginia Unique?
University of Richmond Law Review
The constitutional and statutory safeguards against a person being twice placed in jeopardy for the same offense are well known both to laymen and lawyers alike. What has gone largely unnoticed by the Virginia courts is the applicability of the doctrine of res judicata to the area of criminal law. It is the purpose of this comment to make the reader aware of the doctrine of res judicata as it applies to criminal cases and to attempt to clear up the confusion which has developed in this area of Virginia law.
Recent Legislation, J. Rodney Johnson
Recent Legislation, J. Rodney Johnson
University of Richmond Law Review
The 1972 session of the General Assembly was especially active in the areas of wills, trusts, and estates. Much of this legislation deals with fine points not affecting the average lawyer in his practice. However, the following items of legislation should be of general interest to the attorney whose practice involves probate work or estate planning, even though he does not hold himself out as a specialist in these areas.
An Introduction To Virginia's New Rules Of Criminal Practice And Procedure, Murray J. Janus
An Introduction To Virginia's New Rules Of Criminal Practice And Procedure, Murray J. Janus
University of Richmond Law Review
On January 1, 1972 the new Virginia Rules of Criminal Practice and Procedure became effective, some three and one-half years after the President of the Virginia State Bar Association appointed a Special Committee to draft these proposed Rules. Mr. Justice Thomas C. Gordon, Jr., was appointed Chairman of the Committee in June of 1968. Peter C. Manson, Professor of Criminal Law at the University ,of.Virginia,acted as consultant for the Committee and he made available special student assistants who were invaluable with their research. In addition, two judges of courts of record with criminal jurisdiction, the Honorable Edmund P. Simpkins, Jr., …
Plea Bargaining: The Case For Reform
Plea Bargaining: The Case For Reform
University of Richmond Law Review
Although plea bargaining has not been openly recognized or sanctioned by most courts, it has become quite widespread and effective. Due to this lack of formal recognition, no uniform plea bargaining procedure has been developed, but generally, an accused is encouraged to plead guilty in exchange for some concession, the most familiar being a promise by the prosecutor to ask the court for leniency. Such concession is far from being the only "reward" offered by the state; indeed, if it were the only one, the practice would not have flourished as it has. Depending upon the particular laws of the …
Federal Court Intervention In Pending State Criminal Prosecutions- The Significance Of Younger V. Harris
University of Richmond Law Review
The recent United States Supreme Court decision of Younger v. Harris along with its companion cases represent the most significant development in the area of federal-state court relations since the Court decided Dombrowski v. Pfister in 1965. Dombrowski created grave doubts over the continued validity of the long established public policy against federal court interference with state court proceedings. Civil libertarians were quick to seize upon the broad assertions in that case as support for their efforts toward expanding the concept of federal court intervention in state criminal prosecutions. Though the Court was given the opportunity to reconcile the conflicting …
Drugs- Quantity Of Possession Of A Narcotic Necessary For Conviction
Drugs- Quantity Of Possession Of A Narcotic Necessary For Conviction
University of Richmond Law Review
Most of the states make it unlawful for a person to possess a narcotic drug unless authorized under the narcotic drug statutes. Most jurisdictions have adopted the Uniform Narcotic Drug Act with various amendments." Yet in those states in which the UNDA is not in force, the corresponding laws are nearly identical. Generally, the statutes specify that it is unlawful to possess "any narcotic drug." This phrase is considered by most jurisdictions to specify that any amount, even the slightest trace, is sufficient for a conviction, while other states require that a "usable quantity" must be present.
Possession Of Narcotic Drugs
University of Richmond Law Review
Possession of narcotic drugs, including marijuana, is deemed illegal in Virginia by statute. The concept of possession has been a major contro- versy in criminal proceedings in Virginia and other states. Generally, legal possession has meant the holding of property in one's own power or command. There may be either an actual physical holding, which consists of the power to control the property plus the intent to control the property, or constructive possession, where there is an absence of actual physical control, but a capacity to control along with the intent to control such property.
Cruel And Unusual Punishment-Constitutionality Of The Death Penalty For Rape Where Victim's Life Neither Taken Nor Endangered
University of Richmond Law Review
Throughout history societies have attempted to influence behavior and maintain order through the use of sanctions imposed by custom, tradition and law. Various methods and degrees of punishment have been exacted for anti-social behavior; each individual society fixing its own value upon the interest to be protected and its interest in punishing the offender. Some civilizations have utilized torture, maiming and, not infrequently, cruel and painful deaths as punishment for crimes.
Right To Hearing Upon Extension Of Probation
Right To Hearing Upon Extension Of Probation
University of Richmond Law Review
Aside from the fact that its use was originally limited and random in nature, the historical origin of the probation process is uncertain. Revolutionary changes in the theories controlling the treatment of convicted criminals, however, has resulted in the development of probation into the most widely used form of correctional treatment.
Law And Anarchy, Sidney Hook
Law And Anarchy, Sidney Hook
University of Richmond Law Review
I wish to consider certain views and attitudes about law and government that seem widely held today, that encourage contempt for law and at least indirectly bear on current political behavior.
Criminal Restitution: A Survey Of Its Past History And An Analysis Of Its Present Usefulness, Richard E. Laster
Criminal Restitution: A Survey Of Its Past History And An Analysis Of Its Present Usefulness, Richard E. Laster
University of Richmond Law Review
In the complex structure often inappropriately designated the system of criminal justice,a there are few visible signs of consideration for the party who suffers most from criminal activity-the victim. Yet, historically, this was not always the situation, nor is it necessarily true today in countries other than the United States. Even in the United States compensation plans for victims of crime have been passed by a few state legislatures, and most state statutes on probation allow restitution by the criminal to his victim as a condition thereof. In addition, at the less visible levels of the criminal legal process, restitution …
Psychology And The Criminal Law, Paul E. Meehl
Psychology And The Criminal Law, Paul E. Meehl
University of Richmond Law Review
The two opposite errors a lawyer may make in evaluating the social scientist's contribution to law are to be overly critical and hostile, or to be unduly impressed and uncritically receptive. I have seen examples of both mistakes. The extreme form of the first attitude is shown by the lawyer who frankly believes that psychology, psychiatry, and sociology are mostly "baloney," pretentious disciplines which have abandoned common-sense knowledge of human life but whose claim to have substituted scientific knowledge is spurious. I would like to believe that this hostile attitude is always based upon misinformation or ignorance; but unfortunately, if …
Recent Legislation
University of Richmond Law Review
This is a list of the recent legislation from 1970.
The Law Whose Life Is Not Logic: Evidence Of Other Crimes In Criminal Cases, James W. Payne Jr.
The Law Whose Life Is Not Logic: Evidence Of Other Crimes In Criminal Cases, James W. Payne Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
It is not the intention of the author to concentrate on generalizations in this article, but an introductory comment of a general character on this topic seems unavoidable. Assume that D is on trial for the rape of his fourteen-year-old daughter. He elects not to take the witness stand, claiming this right under the Fifth Amendment. (a) Could W, an older daughter, testify that D raped her several times when she was fourteen years old? (b) Could the prosecutor introduce evidence of a conviction of D for raping W when she was fourteen years old-i.e., would the foregoing offer of …
Recent Cases
University of Richmond Law Review
This is a summary of the case law from 1967.
Recent Cases
University of Richmond Law Review
This is a summary of the case law from 1966.
Notable Legislation Of 1962, Harry L. Snead Jr.
Notable Legislation Of 1962, Harry L. Snead Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
Unless otherwise indicated, the statutes and amendments noted below will be effective on June 29, 1962. All code refer- ences are to the 1950 Code of Virginia.
Corroboration Of Confessions In A Criminal Case In Virginia, James W. Payne Jr.
Corroboration Of Confessions In A Criminal Case In Virginia, James W. Payne Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
The purpose of this brief note is to examine the Virginia rules relating to the requirement of corroboration of an extrajudicial, confession as a basis for conviction of a criminal offense. The rules discussed herein do not, of course, apply to a plea of guilty in open court, and it might be noted too that the title selected by the author may be misleading in that, as a general rule, the rules discussed do apply to incriminating admissions of fact (except those occurring before the alleged criminal act) as well as full confessions. "A confession is the admission of guilt …