Courts Commons^™

Appeals By The Prosecution, Nancy J. King, Michael Heise

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Scholarly and public debates about criminal appeals have largely taken place in an empiri- cal vacuum. This study builds on our prior empirical work exploring defense-initiated criminal appeals and focuses on criminal appeals by state and federal prosecutors. Exploit- ing data drawn from a recently released national sample of appeals by state prosecutors decided in 2010, as well as data from all appeals by federal prosecutors to the U.S. Courts of Appeals terminated in the years 2011 through 2016, we provide a detailed snapshot of noncapital, direct appeals by prosecutors, including extensive information on crime type, claims raised, type of …

Introduction: Perceived Legitimacy And The State Judiciary, G. Alexander Nunn

Vanderbilt Law Review

By and large, judicial authority is a product of perceived validity. Judges lack an independent means of enforcement; they wield "no influence over either the sword or the purse," "neither force nor will." Rather, the judicial branch operates under the auspices of its legitimacy, "a product of substance and perception that shows itself in the people's acceptance of the Judiciary as fit to determine what the Nation's law means and to declare what it demands." When the public sees the judiciary as legitimate, it accepts and adheres to its rulings even when it may perceive certain decisions to be ideologically …

Improving Access To Justice In State Courts With Platform Technology, J.J. Prescott

Vanderbilt Law Review

Access to justice often equates to access to state courts, and for millions of Americans, using state courts to resolve their disputes-often with the government-is a real challenge. Reforms are regularly proposed in the hopes of improving the situation (e.g., better legal aid), but until recently a significant part of the problem has been structural. Using state courts today for all but the simplest of legal transactions entails at the very least traveling to a courthouse and meeting with a decision maker in person and in a one-on-one setting. Even minimally effective access, therefore, requires time, transportation, and very often …

Inferiority Complex: Should State Courts Follow Lower Federal Court Precedent On The Meaning Of Federal Law?, Amanda Frost

Vanderbilt Law Review

The conventional wisdom is that state courts need not follow lower federal court precedent when interpreting federal law. Upon closer inspection, however, the question of how state courts should treat lower federal court precedent is not so clear. Although most state courts now take the conventional approach, a few contend that they are obligated to follow the lower federal courts, and two federal courts of appeals have declared that their decisions are binding on state courts. The Constitution's text and structure send mixed messages about the relationship between state and lower federal courts, and the Supreme Court has never squarely …

Regulating Federal Prosecutors' Ethics, Bruce A. Green, Fred C. Zacharias

Vanderbilt Law Review

To what extent should federal prosecutors be regulated by states, by federal courts, or by the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ) as a matter of self-regulation? This Article concludes that, subject to congressional oversight, federal courts should have the ultimate authority to regulate federal prosecutors. However, it also acknowledges the legitimacy of competing claims by the states and DOJ. Sometimes, federal courts should defer to state court regulation, given traditional state regulation of the practice of law and a host of practical considerations. At other times, federal prosecutors have compelling reasons to seek freedom from both state regulation and regulation …

Judicial Restraints On Illegal State Violence: Israel And The United States, John T. Parry

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Article examines the role of courts in controlling state violence in the United States and Israel. The Author considers how U.S. federal courts should respond to illegal state violence by comparing a U.S. Supreme Court case, "City of Los Angeles v. Lyons", with a case decided by the Supreme Court of Israel, Public Committee Against Torture in Israel v. Israel. Part II highlights the legal issues that were central to each court in reaching a decision, including standing, the scope of equitable discretion to craft remedies, and baseline attitudes towards illegal government action. Part III examines the doctrines discussed …

Judicial Reform At The Lowest Level: A Model Statute For Small Claims Courts, Robert H. Brownlee, Charles L. Lewis, Gregory J. Moonie, William H. Pickering, Paul C. Deemer, Iii Special Projects Editor

Vanderbilt Law Review

The purpose of this Special Project is to analyze the development of procedures for adjudicating small claims, with particular emphasis on the State of Tennessee, and to suggest statutory revisions that may be of value in improving the quality of justice at the lowest level of the judicial system. The Project study commences with an historical survey of the origins of small claims theory and the various court attempts to apply the theory that have been made in the United States during the last half-century. The result of this analysis will be a characterization of a model small claims court.The …

Equity -- 1962 Tennessee Survey, T. A. Smedley

Vanderbilt Law Review

I. Specific Performance--Statute of Frauds

II. Recission--Fraud and Mistake

III. New Trial After Judgment at law

IV. Injunction--Perpetration of a Nuisance

V. Recission--Return of Consideration

State Constitutions, State Courts And First Amendment Freedoms, Monrad G. Paulsen

Vanderbilt Law Review

We have recently been reminded that one of the current and recurrent quandaries of the Supreme Court of the United States arises from the American constitutional system's counterpart of the philosophical problem of the One and the Many. When an individual's freedom is involved, the question is whether and to what degree state legislators, public officials and judicial officers shall be called upon to enforce standards of respect for personal liberties defined by the Federal Constitution and the United States Supreme Court; or, put another way, how far the first eight amendments of the Federal Constitution are incorporated into the …