Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (4)
- Admissibility (3)
- Jurors (2)
- Miranda v. Arizona (2)
- Police (2)
-
- Trials (2)
- Amar (Akhil Reed) (1)
- Appellate review (1)
- Batson v. Kentucky (1)
- Capital punishment (1)
- Children (1)
- Coercion (1)
- Confessions (1)
- Confrontation Clause (1)
- Convictions (1)
- Costs (1)
- Cross-examination (1)
- Custodial interrogations (1)
- Dahmer (Jeffrey) (1)
- Death penalty (1)
- Death row (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Exclusionary rule (1)
- Exclusions (1)
- Executions (1)
- Fairness (1)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Gideon v. Wainwright (1)
- Hearsay (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
On The 'Fruits' Of Miranda Violations, Coerced Confessions, And Compelled Testimony, Yale Kamisar
On The 'Fruits' Of Miranda Violations, Coerced Confessions, And Compelled Testimony, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Professor Akhil Reed Amar and Ms. Renee B. Lettow have written a lively, provocative article that will keep many of us who teach constitutional-criminal procedure busy for years to come. They present a reconception of the "first principles" of the Fifth Amendment, and they suggest a dramatic reconstruction of criminal procedure. As a part of that reconstruction, they propose, inter alia, that at a pretrial hearing presided over by a judicial officer, the government should be empowered to compel a suspect, under penalty of contempt, to provide links in the chain of evidence needed to convict him.
The Warren Court And Criminal Justice: A Quarter-Century Retrospective, Yale Kamisar
The Warren Court And Criminal Justice: A Quarter-Century Retrospective, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Many commentators have observed that when we speak of "the Warren Court," we mean the Warren Court that lasted from 1962 (when Arthur Goldberg replaced Felix Frankfurter) to 1969 (when Earl Warren retired). But when we speak of the Warren Court's "revolution" in American criminal procedure we mean the Warren Court that lasted from 1961 (when the landmark case of Mapp v. Ohio was decided) to 1966 or 1967. In its final years, the Warren Court was not the same Court that had handed down Mapp or Miranda v. Arizona.
Are Twelve Heads Better Than One?, Phoebe C. Ellsworth
Are Twelve Heads Better Than One?, Phoebe C. Ellsworth
Articles
The jury's competence, unlike that of the judge, rests partly on its ability to reflect the perspectives, experiences, and values of the ordinary people in the community - not just the most common or typical community perspective, but the whole range of viewpoints.
Asymmetrical Peremptories Defended: A Reply, Richard D. Friedman
Asymmetrical Peremptories Defended: A Reply, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Three years ago, with the publication of his article ''An Asymmetrical Approach to the Problem of Peremptories" in this journal, Professor Friedman initiated a debate on the subject that was taken up in 1994 by three prosecutors who offered a rebuttal that was also printed in these pages. Professor Friedman continues the debate.
Prior Statements Of A Witness: A Nettlesome Corner Of The Hearsay Thicket, Richard D. Friedman
Prior Statements Of A Witness: A Nettlesome Corner Of The Hearsay Thicket, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
In Tome v United States, for the fifth time in eight years, the Supreme Court decided a case presenting the problem of how a child's allegations of sexual abuse should be presented in court. Often the child who charges that an adult abused her is unable to testify at trial, or at least unable to testify effectively under standard procedures. These cases therefore raise intriguing and difficult questions related to the rule against hearsay and to an accused's right under the Sixth Amendment to confront the witnesses against him. One would hardly guess that, however, from the rather arid debate …
The Romance Of Revenge: An Alternative History Of Jeffrey Dahmer's Trial, Samuel R. Gross
The Romance Of Revenge: An Alternative History Of Jeffrey Dahmer's Trial, Samuel R. Gross
Articles
On Feb. 17, 1992, Jeffrey Dahmer was sentenced to fifteen consecutive terms of life imprisonment for killing and dismembering fifteen young men and boys. Dahmer had been arrested six months earlier, on July 22, 1991. On Jan. 13 he pled guilty to the fifteen murder counts against him, leaving open only the issue of his sanity. Jury selection began two weeks later, and the trial proper started on Jan. 30. The jury heard two weeks of horrifying testimony about murder, mutilation and necrophilia; they deliberated for five hours before finding that Dahmer was sane when he committed thos crimes. After …