Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Evidence Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 11 of 11

Full-Text Articles in Evidence

Should "Clean Hands" Protect The Government Against § 2515 Suppression Under Title Iii Of The Omnibus Crime Control And Safe Streets Act Of 1968?, Francis Marion Hamilton, Iii Sep 1996

Should "Clean Hands" Protect The Government Against § 2515 Suppression Under Title Iii Of The Omnibus Crime Control And Safe Streets Act Of 1968?, Francis Marion Hamilton, Iii

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.


Arizona V. Evans: Carving Out Another Good-Faith Exception To The Exclusionary Rule, Sara Gilbert Jul 1996

Arizona V. Evans: Carving Out Another Good-Faith Exception To The Exclusionary Rule, Sara Gilbert

Mercer Law Review

In Arizona v. Evans, the United States Supreme Court considered whether the exclusionary rule requires suppression of evidence seized incident to an arrest, when the arrest resulted from inaccurate computer data created by court personnel. In January 1991, police arrested Isaac Evans during a routine traffic stop because the patrol car's computer indicated he was the subject of an outstanding misdemeanor warrant. While being handcuffed, Evans dropped a marijuana cigarette. A subsequent search of the vehicle revealed a bag of marijuana hidden under the passenger seat, and Evans was charged with possession. Upon notifying the justice court of the …


A Bludgeon By Any Other Name: The Misuse Of Ethical Rules Against Prosecutors To Control The Law Of The State, Frank O. Bowman Iii Apr 1996

A Bludgeon By Any Other Name: The Misuse Of Ethical Rules Against Prosecutors To Control The Law Of The State, Frank O. Bowman Iii

Faculty Publications

My objective here is threefold: (1) to explain these ethical rules and demonstrate how each is in conflict with longstanding principles of federal criminal law; (2) to explain why these rules are illegitimate, both as rules of ethics and as rules of positive law; and (3) to offer some observations on how the dispute over these rules can sharpen our thinking about the nature and proper limits of ethical rules governing lawyers.


Instructing Illinois Juries On The Definition Of “Reasonable Doubt”: The Need For Reform, 27 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 921 (1996), Timothy P. O'Neill Jan 1996

Instructing Illinois Juries On The Definition Of “Reasonable Doubt”: The Need For Reform, 27 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 921 (1996), Timothy P. O'Neill

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


The Four Greatest Myths About Summary Judgment, James Joseph Duane Jan 1996

The Four Greatest Myths About Summary Judgment, James Joseph Duane

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Clipper Chip Proposal: Deciphering The Unfounded Fears That Are Wrongfully Derailing Its Implementation, 29 J. Marshall L. Rev. 475 (1996), Howard S. Dakoff Jan 1996

The Clipper Chip Proposal: Deciphering The Unfounded Fears That Are Wrongfully Derailing Its Implementation, 29 J. Marshall L. Rev. 475 (1996), Howard S. Dakoff

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.


Introduction: O.J. Simpson And The Criminal Justice System On Trial, Christopher B. Mueller Jan 1996

Introduction: O.J. Simpson And The Criminal Justice System On Trial, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.


That's My Story And I'M Stickin' To It: The Jury As Fifth Business In The Trial Of O.J. Simpson And Other Matters, Marianne Wesson Jan 1996

That's My Story And I'M Stickin' To It: The Jury As Fifth Business In The Trial Of O.J. Simpson And Other Matters, Marianne Wesson

Publications

No abstract provided.


Discovering Who We Are: An English Perspective On The Simpson Trial, William T. Pizzi Jan 1996

Discovering Who We Are: An English Perspective On The Simpson Trial, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.


The Risks Of Death: Why Erroneous Convictions Are Common In Capital Cases (Symposium: The New York Death Penalty In Context), Samuel R. Gross Jan 1996

The Risks Of Death: Why Erroneous Convictions Are Common In Capital Cases (Symposium: The New York Death Penalty In Context), Samuel R. Gross

Articles

As the Supreme Court has said, time and again, death is different: It is "different in kind from any other punishment imposed under our system of criminal justice;"1 it "differs more from life imprisonment than a 100-year sentence differs from one of only a year or two;"' 2 and so forth. Traditionally, this observation has justified special procedural protections for capital defendants. Justice Harlan put it nicely nearly forty years ago: "I do not concede that whatever process is 'due' an offender faced with a fine or a prison sentence necessarily satisfies the requirements of the Constitution in a capital …


Case & Statute Comments, "Public Education And Crime: Supreme Court Backs States' Rights, R. Michael Cassidy Dec 1995

Case & Statute Comments, "Public Education And Crime: Supreme Court Backs States' Rights, R. Michael Cassidy

R. Michael Cassidy

No abstract provided.