Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Supreme Court Preview (19)
- Michigan Law Review (15)
- Articles (11)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (7)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (6)
-
- Touro Law Review (4)
- Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review (3)
- Cleveland State Law Review (1)
- Faculty Publications (1)
- Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity (1)
- Mississippi College Law Review (1)
- Other Publications (1)
- Paul Marcus (1)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat (1)
- William & Mary Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 61 - 73 of 73
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Law
Denying The Crime And Pleading Entrapment: Putting The Federal Law In Order, Richard C. Insalaco, Peter G. Fitzgerald
Denying The Crime And Pleading Entrapment: Putting The Federal Law In Order, Richard C. Insalaco, Peter G. Fitzgerald
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The federal law of procedure in entrapment cases is in profound disarray. Despite four attempts over the past fifty years to clarify the law of pleadings in entrapment cases, the Supreme Court has yet to do so successfully. This Note focuses on these attempts, and analyzes the issue of whether to permit a defendant to plead entrapment while simultaneously denying the crime charged.
Part I reviews the historical development of the entrapment defense, the disagreement among the federal circuits with regard to alternative inconsistent defenses, and the arguments commentators have made for and against allowing alternative inconsistent defenses in entrapment …
Expert Services And The Indigent Criminal Defendant: The Constitutional Madate Of Ake V. Oklahoma, John M. West
Expert Services And The Indigent Criminal Defendant: The Constitutional Madate Of Ake V. Oklahoma, John M. West
Michigan Law Review
This Note attempts to define the boundaries of the indigent criminal defendant's constitutional right to expert assistance, in the light of Ake v. Oklahoma. Part I briefly reviews the Ake decision and examines its constitutional background. Part II inquires into Ake's implications for experts other than psychiatrists and in contexts other than the insanity defense, arguing that the principles that guided the Ake decision have validity well beyond the facts of that case. Part III asks whether the Ake doctrine should be limited to capital cases. Rejecting such a limitation, it concludes that the right to expert assistance …
The Capital Punishment Conundrum, Eric Schnapper
The Capital Punishment Conundrum, Eric Schnapper
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Life in the Balance: Procedural Safeguards in Capital Cases by Welsh S. White
Berger's Defense Of The Death Penalty: How Not To Read The Constitution, Hugo Adam Bedau
Berger's Defense Of The Death Penalty: How Not To Read The Constitution, Hugo Adam Bedau
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Death Penalties: The Supreme Court's Obstacle Course by Raoul Berger
The Death Penalty In America, Michigan Law Review
The Death Penalty In America, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
A Review of The Death Penalty in America (Third Edition) by Hugo Adam Bedau
Pleas Of Guilty And The Loss Of Constitutional Rights: The Current Price Of Pleading Guilty, Stephen A. Saltzburg
Pleas Of Guilty And The Loss Of Constitutional Rights: The Current Price Of Pleading Guilty, Stephen A. Saltzburg
Michigan Law Review
This Article proposes the same basic rule as Westen's to explain the Supreme Court's decisions, but for very different reasons which require several modifications of the Westen rule. I argue that all the guilty-plea cases, properly viewed, are consistent with, and therefore can be read as evidence of, a theory more easily applied than articulated by the Court: that some constitutional rights are largely premised on notions of litigation avoidance, that their "avoidance" rationales must be respected, and that these rights therefore prevent governments from establishing procedural rules that force criminal defendants to go to trial-to choose more rather than …
Forfeiture By Guilty Plea--A Reply, Peter Westen
Forfeiture By Guilty Plea--A Reply, Peter Westen
Michigan Law Review
I will begin by describing what I think Professor Saltzburg and I both mean by a ''legal theory." I then apply that standard to test the validity of the two theories at issue here, first Professor Saltzburg's, then mine. I next discuss a third theory that is independent of both Professor Saltzburg's and mine, viz., that whether a constitutional claim survives a guilty plea depends on whether it is ''jurisdictional." Finally, I comment generally on the concept of forfeiture and its influence on the way one conceives of constitutional rights.
The Restoration Of In Re Winship: A Comment On Burdens Of Persuasion In Criminal Cases After Patterson V. New York, Ronald J. Allen
The Restoration Of In Re Winship: A Comment On Burdens Of Persuasion In Criminal Cases After Patterson V. New York, Ronald J. Allen
Michigan Law Review
At the conclusion of its last term, the Supreme Court rendered what should have been a most unremarkable decision. In Patterson v. New York, the Court upheld New York's affirmative defense of extreme emotional disturbance, which requires a defendant who seeks to reduce his offense from murder to manslaughter to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he acted under extreme emotional disturbance. Had the case come before the Court seven years earlier, it could have been swiftly dispatched with a brief opinion upholding the New York statute on the grounds that the issue of extreme emotional disturbance …
The Confrontation Clause And The Scope Of The Unavailability Requirement, Jerry J. Phillips
The Confrontation Clause And The Scope Of The Unavailability Requirement, Jerry J. Phillips
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The confrontation clause is that language of the sixth amendment to the United States Constitution which provides, "[I]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right… to be confronted with the witnesses against him." Despite the seemingly absolute language of the confrontation clause, which would suggest that no hearsay evidence may be admitted against an accused in a criminal proceeding, its guarantee has been subject to exception. For example, when either a witness to an event or his testimony is shown to be unavailable, others will be allowed to testify as to the information which the declarant-witness has related …
The Reincarnation Of The Death Penalty: Is It Possible?, Yale Kamisar
The Reincarnation Of The Death Penalty: Is It Possible?, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Fifty years ago Clarence Darrow, probably the greatest criminal defense lawyer in American history and a leading opponent of capital punishment, observed: The question of capital punishment has been the subject of endless discussion and will probably never be settled so long as men believe in punishment. Some states have abolished and then reinstated it; some have enjoyed capital punishment for long periods of time and finally prohibited the use of it. The reasons why it cannot be settled are plain. There is first of all no agreement as to the objects of punishment. Next there is no way to …
A Suggestion Concerning The Law Of Inter-State Extradition, Edwin F. Conely
A Suggestion Concerning The Law Of Inter-State Extradition, Edwin F. Conely
Articles
While yet the nation was forming-indeed as early as 1643-the impolicy of the colonies' suffering themselves to become asylums for criminal refugees was seen and appreciated by the public men of the time. But, though continued efforts were made in the right direction and much was accomplished, the rendition of fugitives from justice remained, either legally or practically, a matter of comity for nearly a century and a half, or until the adoption of the Constitution of the United States. Then, made mandatory by the organic law of the Nation, inter-state extradition ceased to be subject to State control or …
The Element Of Locality In The Law Of Criminal Jurisdiction, Henry W. Rogers
The Element Of Locality In The Law Of Criminal Jurisdiction, Henry W. Rogers
Articles
THE Federal Courts have no common law criminal jurisdiction. The question was raised in the United States Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania, in 1798, in United States v. Worrall, 2 Dallas, 384, and the Court was equally divided in opinion. Iii 1818, Mr. Justice STORY, in United States v. Coolidge, 1 Gallison, 488, decided that there were common law offences against the United States. But this, as we shall see, was overruled by the Supreme Court. As early as 1807, Chief Justice MARSHALL, in Ex parte .Bollman, 4 Cranch, 75, had said, "This Court disclaims all jurisdiction not …
The Surrender Of Fugitives From Justice, Thomas M. Cooley
The Surrender Of Fugitives From Justice, Thomas M. Cooley
Articles
The Constitution of the United States provides that "a person charged in any State with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice and be found in another State, shall, on demand of the executive authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having jurisdiction of the crime." The act of Congress of 1793 imposed the duty of surrender upon the executive of the State in which the fugitive should be found, and provided the manner in which the charge of crime should be authenticated for his action. It …