Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Rehabilitating Mental Disorder Evidence After Clark C. Arizona: Of Burdens, Presumptions, And The Rights To Raise Reasonable Doubt, Dora W. Klein
Rehabilitating Mental Disorder Evidence After Clark C. Arizona: Of Burdens, Presumptions, And The Rights To Raise Reasonable Doubt, Dora W. Klein
Faculty Articles
The right not to be found guilty of a crime absent proof beyond a reasonable doubt is a powerful right. It can be undermined, however, by rules that at first seem to have little to do with reasonable doubt or with burdens of proof.
In the recent case of Clark v. Arizona, the Supreme Court considered whether states may enact rules that categorically prohibit criminal defendants from offering mental disorder evidence for the purpose of raising reasonable doubt regarding the mens rea element of a charged offense. In Arizona law, mental disorder evidence is inadmissible for the purpose of disproving …
Federalism And Supreme Court Review Of Expansive State Court Decisions: A Response To Unfortunate Impressions, David A. Schlueter
Federalism And Supreme Court Review Of Expansive State Court Decisions: A Response To Unfortunate Impressions, David A. Schlueter
Faculty Articles
This article addresses the Burger Supreme Court’s approach to federalism and concludes that the Court seems to be reordering federal-state judicial relations. This reordering appears to be occurring at the expense of both state autonomy and individual liberties, especially the rights of state criminal defendants.
Although there certainly have been cases which suggest the Burger Court has a lopsided federalism, upon thorough analysis of these cases, this determination is shown to be incorrect. In fact, the present Court greatly respects state autonomy and the independence of state courts. Further, the Supremacy Clause requires the Court to serve as final arbiter …