Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Fifth amendment (3)
- New york constitution (3)
- United states constitution (3)
- Amendment VI (2)
- Article 1 section 6 (2)
-
- Ineffective Assistance of Counsel (2)
- Police (2)
- Right to counsel (2)
- Supreme court appellate division third department (2)
- Aggravating United States v. McCormick (1)
- Article I section 6 (1)
- Berkemer (1)
- Burden of pleading (1)
- Burden of proof (1)
- C.P.L.R. article 78 (1)
- Capital case (1)
- Child abuse (1)
- Civil forfeiture (1)
- Claudio (1)
- Clear and convincing evidence (1)
- Colorado Constitution (1)
- Confessions (1)
- Confidentiality (1)
- Consent exception (1)
- Court of appeals (1)
- Criminal procedure (1)
- Criminal procedure; Thurgood Marshall; jurisprudence; supreme court; Miranda v. Arizona (1)
- Double Jeopardy Clause (1)
- Due Process (1)
- Due Process Clause (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 14 of 14
Full-Text Articles in Constitutional Law
Visions Of Habeas, David Mccord
Eliminating Double Talk From The Law Of Double Jeopardy, Eli J. Richardson
Eliminating Double Talk From The Law Of Double Jeopardy, Eli J. Richardson
Florida State University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Double Jeopardy, The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, And The Subsequent-Prosecution Dilemma, Elizabeth T. Lear
Double Jeopardy, The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, And The Subsequent-Prosecution Dilemma, Elizabeth T. Lear
UF Law Faculty Publications
The choice to embrace a real-offense regime probably constitutes the single most controversial decision made by the Federal Sentencing Commission in drafting the Federal Sentencing Guidelines ("Guidelines"). Real-offense sentencing bases punishment on a defendant's actual conduct as opposed to the offense of conviction. The Guidelines sweep a variety of factors into the sentencing inquiry, including criminal offenses for which no conviction has been obtained. Under the Guidelines, therefore, prosecutorial charging decisions and even verdicts of acquittal after jury trial may have little impact at sentencing.
Long before the adoption of the Guidelines, courts bent on rationalizing the real-offense regime devised …
Taking The Fifth: Reconsidering The Origins Of The Constitutional Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, Eben Moglen
Taking The Fifth: Reconsidering The Origins Of The Constitutional Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, Eben Moglen
Michigan Law Review
The purpose of this essay is to cast doubt on two basic elements of the received historical wisdom concerning the privilege as it applies to British North America and the early United States. First, early American criminal procedure reflected less tenderness toward the silence of the criminal accused than the received wisdom has claimed. The system could more reasonably be said to have depended on self-incrimination than to have eschewed it, and this dependence increased rather than decreased during the provincial period for reasons intimately connected with the economic and social context of the criminal trial in colonial America.
Second, …
Connecticut V. Doehr And Procedural Due Process Requirements For Prejudgment Remedies: The Sniadach Tetrad Revisited, Linda Beale
Connecticut V. Doehr And Procedural Due Process Requirements For Prejudgment Remedies: The Sniadach Tetrad Revisited, Linda Beale
Law Faculty Research Publications
No abstract provided.
Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel: People V. Morin
Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel: People V. Morin
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel: People V. Claudio
Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel: People V. Claudio
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Preserving A Community Voice: The Case For Half-And-Half Juries In Racially-Charged Criminal Cases, 28 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (1994), Daniel W. Van Ness
Preserving A Community Voice: The Case For Half-And-Half Juries In Racially-Charged Criminal Cases, 28 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (1994), Daniel W. Van Ness
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Due Process: Hillard V. Coughlin Iii
When Terry Met Miranda: Two Constitutional Doctrines Collide, Mark A. Godsey
When Terry Met Miranda: Two Constitutional Doctrines Collide, Mark A. Godsey
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
No abstract provided.
Of Laws And Men: An Essay On Justice Marshall's View Of Criminal Procedure, Bruce A. Green, Daniel C. Richman
Of Laws And Men: An Essay On Justice Marshall's View Of Criminal Procedure, Bruce A. Green, Daniel C. Richman
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Overbroad Civil Forfeiture Statutes Are Unconstitutionally Vague, Deborah Duseau, David Schoenbrod
Overbroad Civil Forfeiture Statutes Are Unconstitutionally Vague, Deborah Duseau, David Schoenbrod
Articles & Chapters
No abstract provided.
The Consent Exception To The Warrant Requirement, H. Patrick Furman
The Consent Exception To The Warrant Requirement, H. Patrick Furman
Publications
No abstract provided.
Brecht V. Abrahamson: Harmful Error In Habeas Corpus Law, James S. Liebman, Randy Hertz
Brecht V. Abrahamson: Harmful Error In Habeas Corpus Law, James S. Liebman, Randy Hertz
Faculty Scholarship
For the past two and one-half decades, the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts have applied the same rule for assessing the harmlessness of constitutional error in habeas corpus proceedings as they have applied on direct appeal of both state and federal convictions. Under that rule, which applied to all constitutional errors except those deemed per se prejudicial or per se reversible, the state could avoid reversal upon a finding of error only by proving that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The Supreme Court adopted this stringent standard in Chapman v. California to fulfill the federal …