Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (340)
- Criminal Procedure (276)
- Criminal Law (187)
- Courts (142)
- Supreme Court of the United States (111)
-
- Evidence (107)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (47)
- Law and Society (44)
- Jurisprudence (40)
- State and Local Government Law (39)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (34)
- Fourteenth Amendment (33)
- Immigration Law (32)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (31)
- Legal Profession (28)
- Judges (24)
- Fourth Amendment (23)
- Legal History (22)
- Litigation (22)
- Law and Race (19)
- Military, War, and Peace (19)
- Health Law and Policy (18)
- Environmental Law (15)
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law (15)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (13)
- Juvenile Law (11)
- Law and Politics (11)
- Legal Remedies (11)
- Legislation (11)
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (143)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (76)
- St. Mary's University (30)
- Selected Works (28)
- SelectedWorks (17)
-
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (15)
- Fordham Law School (14)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (12)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (11)
- Pepperdine University (10)
- New York Law School (9)
- University of Missouri School of Law (9)
- The University of Akron (8)
- University of Colorado Law School (8)
- University of Richmond (8)
- Cornell University Law School (7)
- Southern Methodist University (7)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (7)
- American University Washington College of Law (6)
- Cleveland State University (6)
- University of Baltimore Law (6)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (6)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (6)
- University of South Carolina (6)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (6)
- University of Georgia School of Law (5)
- Barry University School of Law (4)
- Boston University School of Law (4)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (4)
- Florida State University College of Law (4)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (73)
- Michigan Law Review (55)
- Articles (53)
- Faculty Scholarship (21)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (19)
-
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (19)
- All Faculty Scholarship (14)
- Faculty Publications (12)
- Indiana Law Journal (10)
- Scholarly Works (10)
- Articles & Chapters (9)
- Pepperdine Law Review (9)
- Fordham Law Review (8)
- Akron Law Review (7)
- Faculty Articles (7)
- Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters (7)
- Publications (7)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (6)
- Journal Articles (6)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (6)
- South Carolina Law Review (6)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (5)
- Cleveland State Law Review (5)
- Law Faculty Publications (5)
- Richard Daniel Klein (5)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (5)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (4)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (4)
- Florida State University Law Review (4)
- Northern Illinois University Law Review (4)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 61 - 90 of 560
Full-Text Articles in Law
Policy Considerations And Implications In United States V. Bryant, Jessica Larsen
Policy Considerations And Implications In United States V. Bryant, Jessica Larsen
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
No abstract provided.
Pena-Rodriguez V. Colorado: Elevating A Constitutional Exception Above The Tanner Framework, Caroline Covington
Pena-Rodriguez V. Colorado: Elevating A Constitutional Exception Above The Tanner Framework, Caroline Covington
Maryland Law Review
No abstract provided.
Testimonial Statements, Reliability, And The Sole Or Decisive Evidence Rule: A Comparative Look At The Right Of Confrontation In The United States, Canada, And Europe, Deborah Paruch
Catholic University Law Review
Criminal trials in the United States are meant to ascertain the truth. But other societal values, such as fairness to the parties and public confidence in the integrity of the process, are at stake as well. Among the cornerstone rights to protect a defendant’s right to a fair trial is the right to confrontation. The right to confrontation enables a criminal defendant to exclude hearsay evidence from a trial when the defendant did not have an opportunity to cross-examine the witness. This right has undergone substantial changes and revisions over the last decade, both in the United States and abroad. …
Supreme Irrelevance: The Court’S Abdication In Criminal Procedure Jurisprudence, Tonja Jacobi, Ross Berlin
Supreme Irrelevance: The Court’S Abdication In Criminal Procedure Jurisprudence, Tonja Jacobi, Ross Berlin
Faculty Articles
Criminal procedure is one of the Supreme Court’s most active areas of jurisprudence, but the Court’s rulings are largely irrelevant to the actual workings of the criminal justice system. The Court’s irrelevance takes two forms: objectively, on the numbers, its jurisprudence fails to protect the vast majority of people affected by the criminal justice system; and in terms of salience, the Court has sidestepped the major challenges in the United States today relating to the criminal justice system. These challenges include discrimination in stops and frisks, fatal police shootings, unconscionable plea deals, mass incarceration, and disproportionate execution of racial minorities. …
Autonomy Isn't Everything: Some Cautionary Notes On Mccoy V. Louisiana, W. Bradley Wendel
Autonomy Isn't Everything: Some Cautionary Notes On Mccoy V. Louisiana, W. Bradley Wendel
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
The Supreme Court’s May 2018 decision in McCoy v. Louisiana has been hailed as a decisive statement of the priority of the value of a criminal defendant’s autonomy over the fairness and reliability interests that also inform both the Sixth Amendment and the ethical obligations of defense counsel. It also appears to be a victory for the vision of client-centered representation and the humanistic value of the inherent dignity of the accused. However the decision is susceptible to being read too broadly in ways that harm certain categories of defendants. This paper offers a couple of cautionary notes, in response …
Reciprocal Immunity, Colin Miller
Reciprocal Immunity, Colin Miller
Indiana Law Journal
This essay advances a reciprocal rights theory. It argues that the Constitution precludes statutes and rules from providing nonreciprocal benefits to the State when the lack of reciprocity interferes with the defendant’s ability to secure a fair trial, unless reciprocity would implicate a significant state interest. Therefore, unless a significant State interest is involved, a grant of immunity to a prosecution witness should trigger reciprocal immunity to a directly contradictory defense witness.
It’S All Your Fault!: Examining The Defendant’S Use Of Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel As A Means Of Getting A “Second Bite At The Apple.”, Prentice L. White
It’S All Your Fault!: Examining The Defendant’S Use Of Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel As A Means Of Getting A “Second Bite At The Apple.”, Prentice L. White
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
The United States Constitution provides individuals convicted of a crime with “a second bite at the apple.” The Sixth Amendment provides an avenue to appeal one’s conviction based on the claim of “ineffective assistance of counsel.” What were the Framers’ true intentions in using the phrase “effective assistance of counsel”? How does the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) of 1996 affect habeas corpus appeals? This article answers these questions through the eyes of Thomas—a fictional character who is appealing his murder conviction.
This article first looks at the history surrounding effective assistance of counsel and discusses the difficulties …
Fairness Over Finality: Peña-Rodriguez V. Colorado And The Right To An Impartial Jury, Katherine Brosamle
Fairness Over Finality: Peña-Rodriguez V. Colorado And The Right To An Impartial Jury, Katherine Brosamle
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Racial Character Evidence In Police Killing Cases, Jasmine Gonzales Rose
Racial Character Evidence In Police Killing Cases, Jasmine Gonzales Rose
Faculty Scholarship
The United States is facing a twofold crisis: police killings of people of color and unaccountability for these killings in the criminal justice system. In many instances, the officers’ use of deadly force is captured on video and often appears clearly unjustified, but grand and petit juries still fail to indict and convict, leaving many baffled. This Article provides an explanation for these failures: juror reliance on “racial character evidence.” Too often, jurors consider race as evidence in criminal trials, particularly in police killing cases where the victim was a person of color. Instead of focusing on admissible evidence, jurors …
Defense Counsel And Public Defence, Eve Brensike Primus
Defense Counsel And Public Defence, Eve Brensike Primus
Book Chapters
Public-defense delivery systems nationwide are grossly inadequate. Public defenders are forced to handle caseloads that no one could effectively manage. They often have no funding for investigation or expert assistance. They aren’t adequately trained, and there is little to no oversight of their work. In many jurisdictions, the public-defense function is not sufficiently independent of the judiciary or the elected branches to allow for zealous representation. The result is an assembly line into prison, mostly for poor people of color, with little check on the reliability or fairness of the process. Innocent people are convicted, precious resources are wasted, and …
"Another Day" Has Dawned: The Maine Supreme Judicial Court Holds Laboratory Evidence Subject To The Confrontation Clause In State V. Mangos, Reid Hayton-Hull
"Another Day" Has Dawned: The Maine Supreme Judicial Court Holds Laboratory Evidence Subject To The Confrontation Clause In State V. Mangos, Reid Hayton-Hull
Maine Law Review
The Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause guarantees criminal defendants the right to “confront witnesses against them.” Specifically, the Clause ensures a criminal defendant's right to confront witnesses who testify against him by the unique medium, or “crucible,” of cross-examination. Although federal and state rules of evidence prohibiting hearsay and the Confrontation Clause are designed to protect similar interests, whether or not admission of a piece of evidence violates a defendant's rights under the Confrontation Clause is a separate analysis than whether that same piece of evidence is admissible under a rule of evidence. In 2004, the United States Supreme Court held …
Confronting Crawford: Justice Scalia, The Judicial Method, And The Limits(?) Of Originalism, Gary S. Lawson
Confronting Crawford: Justice Scalia, The Judicial Method, And The Limits(?) Of Originalism, Gary S. Lawson
Faculty Scholarship
Crawford v. Washington, which revamped (and even revolutionized) interpretation and application of the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause, just might be Justice Scalia’s most important majority opinion, for three reasons. First, its impact on the criminal justice system has been immense, and even if the case is overruled in the near future, as seems quite possible, that effect will still likely exceed the concrete impact of any other opinion that he wrote. Second, and more importantly, Crawford emphasizes the trite but crucial point that methodology matters. Crawford has generally been a boon to criminal defendants and a bane to prosecutors. When …
Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky
Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky
Erwin Chemerinsky
No abstract provided.
In Their Defense: Conflict Between The Criminal Defendant’S Right To Counsel Of Choice And The Right To Appointed Counsel, Kit Thomas
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Qualitative Diversity: Affirmative Action's New Reframe, Eang L. Ngov
Qualitative Diversity: Affirmative Action's New Reframe, Eang L. Ngov
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
From Grace To Grids: Rethinking Due Process Protections For Parole., Kimberly A. Thomas, Paul D. Reingold
From Grace To Grids: Rethinking Due Process Protections For Parole., Kimberly A. Thomas, Paul D. Reingold
Articles
Current due process law gives little protection to prisoners at the point of parole, even though the parole decision, like sentencing, determines whether or not a person will serve more time or will go free. The doctrine regarding parole, which developed mostly in the late 1970s, was based on a judicial understanding of parole as an experimental, subjective, and largely standardless art—rooted in assessing the individual “character” of the potential parolee. In this Article we examine the foundations of the doctrine, and conclude that the due process inquiry at the point of parole should take into account the stark changes …
The Replacements: Conflicting Standards For Obtaining New Counsel Under The Sixth Amendment, Sharon Finegan
The Replacements: Conflicting Standards For Obtaining New Counsel Under The Sixth Amendment, Sharon Finegan
Cleveland State Law Review
In 2006, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez emphasizing the importance of a defendant’s right to counsel of choice under the Sixth Amendment and holding a denial of this right constitutes structural error, requiring automatic reversal. Following that decision, several federal circuit courts and state appellate courts have questioned how to apply this right to circumstances where the right to choice of counsel and the right to appointed counsel overlap. When a defendant seeks to replace retained counsel for appointed counsel, should the standard governing his motion fall under the right to choice of …
Disentangling Miranda And Massiah: How To Revive The Sixth Amendment Right To Counsel As A Tool For Regulating Confession Law, Eve Brensike Primus
Disentangling Miranda And Massiah: How To Revive The Sixth Amendment Right To Counsel As A Tool For Regulating Confession Law, Eve Brensike Primus
Articles
Fifty years after Miranda v. Arizona, many have lamented the ways in which the Burger, Rehnquist, and Roberts Courts have cut back on Miranda's protections. One underappreciated a spect of Miranda's demise is the way it has affected the development of the pretrial Sixth Amendment right to counsel guaranteed by Massiah v. United States. Much of the case law diluting suspects' Fifth Amendment Miranda rights has bled over into the Sixth Amendment right to counsel cases without consideration of whether the animating purposes of the Massiah pretrial right to counsel would support such an importation. This development is unfortunate …
The Law Court's Unfinished Analysis In State V. Ali: Applying Padilla In Maine To Remove Procedural Barriers To Non-Citizens' Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel Claims, Hannah M. Mcmullen
The Law Court's Unfinished Analysis In State V. Ali: Applying Padilla In Maine To Remove Procedural Barriers To Non-Citizens' Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel Claims, Hannah M. Mcmullen
Maine Law Review
The outcome in State v. Ali exemplifies the procedural barriers that prevent a non-citizen of the United States from raising an ineffective assistance of counsel claim while subject to deportation as a result of a criminal conviction pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act. Fahad Ali, a non-citizen of the United States residing in Maine, pleaded guilty to and was convicted of aggravated trafficking of marijuana and was subsequently subject to deportation as a result of that conviction. Ali filed a motion for a new trial claiming that he did not receive effective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment, …
Motion For Leave To File Amicus Curiae Brief And Brief For The National Association For Public Defense And Kentucky Association Of Criminal Defense Lawyers As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Sneed V. Burress (U.S. March 24, 2017) (No. 16-8047)., Janet Moore
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
No abstract provided.
"Facts Are Stubborn Things": Protecting Due Process From Virulent Publicity, Benjamin Brafman, Darren Stakey
"Facts Are Stubborn Things": Protecting Due Process From Virulent Publicity, Benjamin Brafman, Darren Stakey
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Downstream Consequences Of Misdemeanor Pretrial Detention, Paul Heaton, Sandra G. Mayson, Megan Stevenson
The Downstream Consequences Of Misdemeanor Pretrial Detention, Paul Heaton, Sandra G. Mayson, Megan Stevenson
Scholarly Works
In misdemeanor cases, pretrial detention poses a particular problem because it may induce innocent defendants to plead guilty in order to exit jail, potentially creating widespread error in case adjudication. While practitioners have long recognized this possibility, empirical evidence on the downstream impacts of pretrial detention on misdemeanor defendants and their cases remains limited. This Article uses detailed data on hundreds of thousands of misdemeanor cases resolved in Harris County, Texas—the thirdlargest county in the United States—to measure the effects of pretrial detention on case outcomes and future crime. We find that detained defendants are 25% more likely than similarly …
No Un Jurado De Mis Pares: Juror Exclusion Of Limited English Proficient Speakers., Michael Mccann
No Un Jurado De Mis Pares: Juror Exclusion Of Limited English Proficient Speakers., Michael Mccann
The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice
In the context of fulfilling civic duties as a citizen, accessibility to language assistance programs ensures every individual, including those with limited English proficiency (LEP), is afforded the opportunity to exercise their fundamental rights. Preservation of the integrity of the justice system must be provided in a comprehensive manner, not merely in one part of the legal proceedings or isolated to one part of the courthouse. LEP citizens should be integrated in public society, not disqualified from it. Statutes that create overly burdensome language proficiency standards create problems with the jury selection process. These standards limit and often deny LEP …
The Choice Between Right And Easy: Pena-Rodriguez V. Colorado And The Necessity Of A Racial Bias Exception To Rule 606(B), Kevin Zhao
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
Traditionally, under Rule 606(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, jurors are barred from testifying towards matters within juror deliberations. However, many jurisdictions in the United States have adopted an exception to this rule for racial prejudice. That is, if a juror comes forward post-verdict to testify that another juror made racially charged comments within the jury room, then the verdict may be overturned. The Supreme Court will address this issue in its upcoming decision in Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado. This commentary will argue that a racial bias exception is necessary to protect defendants' rights to a fair trial and …
The Ideological Origins Of The Right To Counsel, John Felipe Acevedo
The Ideological Origins Of The Right To Counsel, John Felipe Acevedo
South Carolina Law Review
No abstract provided.
Justice Scalia’S Originalism And Formalism: The Rule Of Criminal Law As A Law Of Rules, Stephanos Bibas
Justice Scalia’S Originalism And Formalism: The Rule Of Criminal Law As A Law Of Rules, Stephanos Bibas
All Faculty Scholarship
Far too many reporters and pundits collapse law into politics, assuming that the left–right divide between Democratic and Republican appointees neatly explains politically liberal versus politically conservative outcomes at the Supreme Court. The late Justice Antonin Scalia defied such caricatures. His consistent judicial philosophy made him the leading exponent of originalism, textualism, and formalism in American law, and over the course of his three decades on the Court, he changed the terms of judicial debate. Now, as a result, supporters and critics alike start with the plain meaning of the statutory or constitutional text rather than loose appeals to legislative …
Hurst V. Florida’S Ha’P’Orth Of Tar: The Need To Revisit Caldwell, Clemons, And Proffitt, Craig Trocino, Chance Meyer
Hurst V. Florida’S Ha’P’Orth Of Tar: The Need To Revisit Caldwell, Clemons, And Proffitt, Craig Trocino, Chance Meyer
University of Miami Law Review
In Hurst v. Florida, the Supreme Court held Florida’s death penalty scheme violated the Sixth Amendment because judges, rather than juries, found sentencing facts necessary to impose death. That Sixth Amendment ruling has implications for Florida’s Eighth Amendment jurisprudence.
Under the Eighth Amendment rule of Caldwell v. Mississippi, capital juries must appreciate their responsibility for death sentencing. Yet, Florida has instructed juries that their fact-findings merely support sentencing recommendations, while leaving the ultimate sentencing decision to a judge. Because Hurst clarifies that the Sixth Amendment requires juries to find the operative set of facts on which sentences are …
Forfeiture-By-Wrongdoing And Faretta: Reaffirming Counsel's Vital Role When Defendants Manipulate Competing Sixth Amendment Representation Rights, Marc C. Mcallister
Forfeiture-By-Wrongdoing And Faretta: Reaffirming Counsel's Vital Role When Defendants Manipulate Competing Sixth Amendment Representation Rights, Marc C. Mcallister
Hofstra Law Review
Both the right to self-representation and the right to representation by counsel are fundamental rights secured by the same Sixth Amendment text, and the consequence for preventing a defendant from freely exercising either right is automatic reversal of conviction. Most defendants proceed to trial having clearly elected either competing right, thereby thwarting the danger of automatic reversal. Certain manipulative defendants, however, will pit these rights against each other by deliberately failing to elect either one, placing trial courts in precarious positions with reversible error on the line. When a defendant fails to choose either of his Sixth Amendment rights, a …
Rescued From The Grave And Then Covered With Mud: Justice Scalia And The Unfinished Restoration Of The Confrontation Right, Richard D. Friedman
Rescued From The Grave And Then Covered With Mud: Justice Scalia And The Unfinished Restoration Of The Confrontation Right, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Some years before his death, when asked which was his favorite among his opinions, Antonin Scalia named Crawford v. Washington. It was a good choice. Justice Scalia's opinion in Crawford reclaimed the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution and restored it to its rightful place as one of the central protections of our criminal justice system. He must have found it particularly satisfying that the opinion achieved this result by focusing on the historical meaning of the text, and that it gained the concurrence of all but two members of the Court, from all ideological positions.
Better Not Call Saul: The Impact Of Criminal Attorneys On Their Clients' Sixth Amendment Right To Effective Assistance Of Counsel, Veronica J. Finkelstein
Better Not Call Saul: The Impact Of Criminal Attorneys On Their Clients' Sixth Amendment Right To Effective Assistance Of Counsel, Veronica J. Finkelstein
University of Cincinnati Law Review
No abstract provided.