Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Harmless Error In Federal Habeas Corpus After Brecht V. Abrahamson, John H. Blume, Stephen P. Garvey
Harmless Error In Federal Habeas Corpus After Brecht V. Abrahamson, John H. Blume, Stephen P. Garvey
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
The law of habeas corpus has changed again. This time it was the law of harmless error. Before Brecht v. Abrahamson, the courts applied the same harmless error rule on direct appeal and in federal habeas corpus. Under that rule, embraced for constitutional errors in Chapman v. California, a conviction tainted by a constitutional error susceptible to harmless error analysis could be upheld only if the state demonstrated that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. After Brecht, the venerable Chapman rule still applies to constitutional errors identified and reviewed on direct appeal, but an ostensibly "less …
Harmless Error In Federal Habeas Corpus After Brecht V. Abrahamson, John H. Blume, Stephen P. Garvey
Harmless Error In Federal Habeas Corpus After Brecht V. Abrahamson, John H. Blume, Stephen P. Garvey
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Brecht V. Abrahamson: Another Step Toward Evisceration Of Habeas Corpus, Lisa S. Spickler
Brecht V. Abrahamson: Another Step Toward Evisceration Of Habeas Corpus, Lisa S. Spickler
University of Richmond Law Review
As the amount of crime in this country increases, society is becoming more conscious of our criminal justice system. People are increasingly concerned with the outcome of criminal trials, specifically in assuring that crimes do not go unpunished. Determining guilt, ensuring that verdicts are not overruled on a "technicality," and issuing punishment have taken precedence over the protection of constitutional rights. However, the Constitution is not only concerned with the outcome of criminal trials. It is just as surely concerned with individual rights and process.