Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Excluding Coerced Witness Testimony To Protect A Criminal Defendant's Right To Due Process Of Law And Adequately Deter Police Misconduct, Katherine Sheridan
Excluding Coerced Witness Testimony To Protect A Criminal Defendant's Right To Due Process Of Law And Adequately Deter Police Misconduct, Katherine Sheridan
Fordham Urban Law Journal
This Note argues that the Due Process Clause must protect criminal defendants from the admission of an involuntary statement made by a witness. Part I discusses the history of the use of involuntary statements, specifically the justifications for the exclusion of coerced confessions. Part II examines how various courts have addressed the issue and have come to different conclusions. Part III explains why involuntary witness statements should be excluded under the Due Process Clause in criminal trials.
The Abortion Debate Thirty Years Later: From Choice To Coercion, Maureen Kramlich
The Abortion Debate Thirty Years Later: From Choice To Coercion, Maureen Kramlich
Fordham Urban Law Journal
This article critiques the notion of abortion as a "positive liberty." The author argues that the court's holding in Roe v. Wade created a negative right to abortion, meaning that an individual seeking an abortion is merely protected from government interference. Over time, "pro-abortion" advocates have sought a positive right to access an abortion, including government funding. The author finds this position problematic and outside the scope of Roe, particularly as it erodes religious healthcare providers' right to refuse to perform the procedure.
Criminal Law- Reckless Endangerment And Coercion- Union Officials May Be Liable To Criminal Prosecution In Strike Of Essential Public Employees. People V. Vizzini, 78 Misc. 2d 1040, 359 N.Y.S.2d 143 (Sup. Ct. 1974)., James Clark Quinn
Fordham Urban Law Journal
Defendants, officers of the Uniformed Firefighters Association (UFA), were charged with reckless endangerment in the second degree, attempted coercion, reckless endangerment of property, and related crimes. The basis of these charges was the five and one-half hour New York City fireman's strike called by defendants despite express Taylor Law prohibitions against strikes by public employees. Defendants moved to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that a strike by firemen could not be the basis of a criminal prosecution, arguing that the Taylor Law provided the exclusive remedies and sanctions for public employee labor disputes. The New York Supreme Court denied …