Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Warren Court (2)
- Chief Justice Warren (1)
- Coercion (1)
- Confessions (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
-
- Custodial interrogations (1)
- Dickerson v. United States (1)
- Exclusionary rule (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Mapp v. Ohio (1)
- Miranda v. Arizona (1)
- Obscenity (1)
- Ohio Supreme Court (1)
- Police (1)
- Rehnquist Court (1)
- Search and seizure (1)
- Self-incrimination (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Term limits (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Reining In The Supreme Court: Are Term Limits The Answer?, Arthur D. Hellman
Reining In The Supreme Court: Are Term Limits The Answer?, Arthur D. Hellman
Book Chapters
Once again, life tenure for Supreme Court Justices is under attack. The most prominent proposal for reform is to adopt a system of staggered non-renewable terms of 18 years, designed so that each President would have the opportunity to fill two vacancies during a four-year term. This book chapter, based on a presentation at a conference at Duke Law School, addresses the criticisms of life tenure and analyzes the likely consequences of moving to a system of 18-year staggered terms for Supreme Court Justices.
One of the main arguments for term limits is, in essence, that the Supreme Court should …
Mapp V. Ohio: The First Shot Fired In The Warren Court's Criminal Procedure 'Revolution', Yale Kamisar
Mapp V. Ohio: The First Shot Fired In The Warren Court's Criminal Procedure 'Revolution', Yale Kamisar
Book Chapters
Although Earl Warren ascended to the Supreme Court in 1953, when we speak of the Warren Court's "revolution" in American criminal procedure we really mean the movement that got underway half-way through the Chief Justice's sixteen-year reign. It was the 1961 case of Mapp v. Ohio, overruling Wolf v. Colorado and holding that the state courts had to exclude illegally seized evidence as a matter of federal constitutional law, that is generally regarded as having launched the so-called criminal procedure revolution.
Dickerson V. United States: The Case That Disappointed Miranda's Critics - And Then Its Supporters, Yale Kamisar
Dickerson V. United States: The Case That Disappointed Miranda's Critics - And Then Its Supporters, Yale Kamisar
Book Chapters
It is difficult, if not impossible, to discuss Dickerson1 intelligently without discussing Miranda whose constitutional status Dickerson reaffirmed (or, one might say, resuscitated). It is also difficult, if not impossible, to discuss the Dickerson case intelligently without discussing cases the Court has handed down in the five years since Dickerson was decided. The hard truth is that in those five years the reaffirmation of Miranda's constitutional status has become less and less meaningful. In this chapter I focus on the Court's characterization of statements elicited in violation of the Miranda warnings as not actually "coerced" or "compelled" but obtained merely …