Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Series

Criminal Procedure

Criminal Law and Procedure

University of Georgia School of Law

Articles 1 - 11 of 11

Full-Text Articles in Law

Crumbs From The Master's Table: The Supreme Court, Pro Se Defendants And The Federal Guilty Plea Process, Julian A. Cook Dec 2006

Crumbs From The Master's Table: The Supreme Court, Pro Se Defendants And The Federal Guilty Plea Process, Julian A. Cook

Scholarly Works

This Article will commence with a review of the rather significant evolution of Rule 11, including a review of several pertinent Supreme Court decisions that have helped shape its current structure. Thereafter, the predominant judicial methodology for conducting Rule 11 hearings will be discussed. Specifically, this Article will take a brief but critical look at, inter alia, the examination techniques employed by the judiciary when conducting Rule 11 hearings, and conclude that the process typically employed inadequately assesses whether a defendant's guilty plea was entered into knowingly and voluntarily. Next, this Article will discuss two very recent Supreme Court ...


Habeas Corpus And Baseball, Donald E. Wilkes Jr. Mar 2006

Habeas Corpus And Baseball, Donald E. Wilkes Jr.

Scholarly Works

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries playing baseball on Sundays was a criminal offense in many states, where police often aggressively intervened to prevent or stop baseball games from being played on the Sabbath. In 1894, “the police of the city of Brooklyn took it upon themselves to chase, club and lock up all boys and men found playing ball on Sunday,” People ex rel. Poole v. Hesterberg, 43 Misc. 510, 89 N.Y.S. 498, 499 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Kings County 1904); on two consecutive Sundays in July 1910, two professional baseball teams attempting to play ...


Causing Constitutional Harm: How Tort Law Can Help Determine Harmless Error In Criminal Trials, Jason M. Solomon May 2005

Causing Constitutional Harm: How Tort Law Can Help Determine Harmless Error In Criminal Trials, Jason M. Solomon

Scholarly Works

This Article proceeds in four parts. Part II is a brief overview of harmless-error doctrine in the context of habeas challenges to state criminal convictions, focusing on the nature of the inquiry and the doctrinal deadlock described above. Part III is an empirical analysis of the post-Brecht cases in the federal courts of appeals. To search for a way out of the doctrinal deadlock, I started with a relatively straightforward question: what has happened to harmless-error analysis since Brecht? To answer this question, I reviewed and, with the help of a research assistant, coded all of the 315 harmless-error ...


The Writ Of Habeas Corpus, Donald E. Wilkes Jr. Jan 2002

The Writ Of Habeas Corpus, Donald E. Wilkes Jr.

Scholarly Works

A fundamental legal safeguard of freedom and the most important English common law writ, the writ of habeas corpus is a court order commanding that an imprisoned person be personally produced in court and that an explanation be provided as to why that person is detained. The writ of habeas corpus provides a judicial remedy for enforcing a fundamental individual right, the right to personal liberty, which may be defined as the right to be free of physical restraint that is not justified by law. Whenever imprisonment violates a constitutional or fundamental right, there is an infringement of the right ...


The Georgia Death Penalty Habeas Corpus Reform Act Of 1995, Donald E. Wilkes Jr. Nov 1995

The Georgia Death Penalty Habeas Corpus Reform Act Of 1995, Donald E. Wilkes Jr.

Scholarly Works

On April 10, 1995, Gov. Zell Miller signed into law Georgia's Death Penalty Habeas Corpus Reform Act of 1995. The Act is premised upon the following findings and determinations of the General Assembly: that through direct appeal, sentence review, and habeas corpus the state now provides persons sentenced to death "adequate opportunities" to assert their constitutional rights; that habeas corpus proceedings should not be used by persons sentenced to death "solely as a delaying tactic under the guise of asserting rights;" and that "strict compliance" with habeas corpus procedures "will prevent the waste of limited resources and will eliminate ...


Postconviction Habeas Corpus Relief In Georgia: A Decade After The Habeas Corpus Act, Donald E. Wilkes Jr. Jan 1978

Postconviction Habeas Corpus Relief In Georgia: A Decade After The Habeas Corpus Act, Donald E. Wilkes Jr.

Scholarly Works

Part II of this Article will highlight the grounds for relief from a conviction or sentence that were available to a Georgia prisoner prior to 1967 and the procedural obstacles to relief that existed. Part III will explore the grounds for relief currently available, and Part IV will examine the procedural obstacles to postconviction relief that remain. Part V will briefly summarize the availability of postconfiction relief in federal court to determine whether the 1967 Act has in fact eliminated the friction between the state courts and the federal courts.


"A Most Deplorable Paradox": Admitting Illegally Obtained Evidence In Georgia--Past, Present, And Future, Donald E. Wilkes Jr. Sep 1976

"A Most Deplorable Paradox": Admitting Illegally Obtained Evidence In Georgia--Past, Present, And Future, Donald E. Wilkes Jr.

Scholarly Works

This Article explores the admissibility of illegally obtained evidence in Georgia criminal cases prior to 1961 and during the post-Mapp era and endeavors to assess the future admissibility of illegally seized evidence in Georgia under both federal and state law.


A New Role For An Ancient Writ: Postconviction Habeas Corpus Relief In Georgia (Part Ii), Donald E. Wilkes Jr. Sep 1974

A New Role For An Ancient Writ: Postconviction Habeas Corpus Relief In Georgia (Part Ii), Donald E. Wilkes Jr.

Scholarly Works

In Part I of this Article, appearing in Volume 8 of the Georgia Law Review at page 313, Professor Wilkes traced the development of postconviction habeas corpus in Georgia up to 1967. In this the second part of the Article, he examines the background and passage of the Georgia Habeas Corpus Act of 1967. Finally, Professor Wilkes assesses the degree to which the Act has fulfilled its purposes, and suggests several possible changes for the future.


"Criminal Records"--A Comparative Approach, Sigmund A. Cohn Feb 1974

"Criminal Records"--A Comparative Approach, Sigmund A. Cohn

Scholarly Works

There is in the United States a need to balance the interest of the public in the apprehension and conviction of criminals with that of individuals arrested but not convicted of any wrongdoing. As has been shown, some of the leading civil law countries have approached this goal in two ways: first, by not requiring an arrest in a great number of criminal cases and thus not furthering in the mind of the public the idea that arrest and criminal wrongdoing are identical, and second, by confining entries in criminal records, at least on principle, to final convictions of criminal ...


A New Role For An Ancient Writ: Postconviction Habeas Corpus Relief In Georgia (Part I), Donald E. Wilkes Jr. Jan 1974

A New Role For An Ancient Writ: Postconviction Habeas Corpus Relief In Georgia (Part I), Donald E. Wilkes Jr.

Scholarly Works

Because it has been esteemed in this state for centuries, the writ of habeas corpus has played a significant role in the history of Georgia civil liberties. Indeed, one Georgia court early state that "[w]hen the writ is applied for, no inquiry is made as to the complexion of the petitioner, or the place of his permanent allegiance. All of every condition, of every country and of every complexion are equally entitled to it, the native of South Africa, not less than the Peer of the Realms." In the first part of his Article, Professor Wilkes examines the origins ...


Warrantless Searches And Seizures, Mack Allen Player Jan 1971

Warrantless Searches And Seizures, Mack Allen Player

Scholarly Works

The fourth amendment to the Constitution has two basic clauses. The first, the reasonableness clause, protects the people against unreasonable searches and seizures. The second, the warrant clause, sets forth conditions under which a warrant may issue. Searches and seizures made pursuant to a warrant are, quite obviously, governed by the commands of the warrant clause. However, the effect of the warrant clause upon searches and seizures made without warrants is not clear from the amendment itself, and the Supreme Court has failed to develop a consistent interpretation of the proper role of that clause.