Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
![Digital Commons Network](http://assets.bepress.com/20200205/img/dcn/DCsunburst.png)
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (2)
- Courts (2)
- Judges (2)
- Law and Society (2)
- Psychology and Psychiatry (2)
-
- Sexuality and the Law (2)
- Voir dire (2)
- Actuarial tests (1)
- Appeals (1)
- Appellate courts (1)
- Batson v. Kentucky (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Civil rights litigation (1)
- Cognition (1)
- Credibility assessments (1)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (1)
- Criminal procedure (1)
- Due process (1)
- Emotion (1)
- Emotional (1)
- Epistemology (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Exculpatory testimony (1)
- Expert testimony (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Feminine (1)
- Feminist (1)
- Habeas corpus (1)
- Health Law and Policy (1)
- Immigration (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Civil Rights and Discrimination
Race And Recalcitrance: The Miller-El Remands, Sheri Johnson
Race And Recalcitrance: The Miller-El Remands, Sheri Johnson
Sheri Lynn Johnson
In Batson v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court held that a prosecutor may not peremptorily challenge a juror based upon his or her race. Although Baston was decided more than twenty years ago, some lower courts still resist its command. Three recent cases provide particularly egregious examples of that resistance. The Fifth Circuit refused the Supreme Court's instruction in Miller-El v. Cockrell, necessitating a second grant of certiorari in Miller-El v. Dretke. The court then reversed and remanded four lower court cases for reconsideration in light of Miller-El, but in two cases the lower courts have thus …
The Color Of Truth: Race And The Assessment Of Credibility, Sheri Lynn Johnson
The Color Of Truth: Race And The Assessment Of Credibility, Sheri Lynn Johnson
Sheri Lynn Johnson
No abstract provided.
Plaintiphobia In The Appellate Courts: Civil Rights Really Do Differ From Negotiable Instruments, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg
Plaintiphobia In The Appellate Courts: Civil Rights Really Do Differ From Negotiable Instruments, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg
Kevin M. Clermont
Professors Clermont and Eisenberg conducted a systematic analysis of appellate court behavior and report that defendants have a substantial advantage over plaintiffs on appeal. Their analysis attempted to control for different variables that may affect the decision to appeal or the appellate outcome, including case complexity, case type, amount in controversy, and whether there had been a judge or a jury trial. Once they accounted for these variables and explored and discarded various alternate explanations, they came to the conclusion that a defendants' advantage exists probably because of appellate judges' misperceptions that trial level adjudicators are pro-plaintiff.
Federal Civil Rights Litigation Pursuant To 42 U.S.C. §1983 As A Correlate Of Police Misconduct, Philip M. Stinson, Steven L. Brewer Jr, Theresa M. Lanese, Mallorie A. Wilson
Federal Civil Rights Litigation Pursuant To 42 U.S.C. §1983 As A Correlate Of Police Misconduct, Philip M. Stinson, Steven L. Brewer Jr, Theresa M. Lanese, Mallorie A. Wilson
Philip M Stinson
Police officers acting in their official capacity are subject to being sued in federal court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 for violating constitutional rights under the color of law. Using data obtained in a larger study on police crime in the United States, names of more than 5,500 nonfederal sworn law enforcement officers who were arrested during the years 2005-2011 were checked against the civil case party master name index of the federal courts’ Public Access to Courts Electronic Records (PACER) system. Findings indicate that more than 20% of the police officers who were arrested for committing one or more …
Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma Marouf
Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma Marouf
Fatma Marouf
“Far From The Turbulent Space”: Considering The Adequacy Of Counsel In The Representation Of Individuals Accused Of Being Sexually Violent Predators, Michael L. Perlin, Heather Ellis Cucolo
“Far From The Turbulent Space”: Considering The Adequacy Of Counsel In The Representation Of Individuals Accused Of Being Sexually Violent Predators, Michael L. Perlin, Heather Ellis Cucolo
Michael L Perlin
Abstract:
For the past thirty years, the US Supreme Court's standard of Strickland v. Washington has governed the question of adequacy of counsel in criminal trials. There, in a Sixth Amendment analysis, the Supreme Court acknowledged that simply having a lawyer assigned to a defendant was not constitutionally adequate, but that that lawyer must provide "effective assistance of counsel," effectiveness being defined, pallidly, as requiring simply that counsel's efforts be “reasonable” under the circumstances. The benchmark for judging an ineffectiveness claim is simply “whether counsel’s conduct so undermined the proper function of the adversarial process that the trial court cannot …
Tell Us A Story, But Don't Make It A Good One: Resolving The Confusion Regarding Emotional Stories And Federal Rule Of Evidence 403, Cathren Page
Cathren Page
Abstract: Tell Us a Story, But Don’t Make It A Good One: Resolving the Confusion Regarding Emotional Stories and Federal Rule of Evidence 403 by Cathren Koehlert-Page Courts need to reword their opinions regarding Rule 403 to address the tension between the advice to tell an emotionally evocative story at trial and the notion that evidence can be excluded if it is too emotional. In the murder mystery Mystic River, Dave Boyle is kidnapped in the beginning. The audience feels empathy for Dave who as an adult becomes one of the main suspects in the murder of his friend Jimmy’s …