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

Judges Commons

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

Articles 1 - 24 of 24

Full-Text Articles in Judges

Innocent Until Proven Arrested: How Pretrial Juvenile Detention For Nonviolent Offenders In Ohio Inflicts Constitutional Violations, Taryn Schoenfeld Jun 2022

Innocent Until Proven Arrested: How Pretrial Juvenile Detention For Nonviolent Offenders In Ohio Inflicts Constitutional Violations, Taryn Schoenfeld

Et Cetera

When a juvenile is accused of committing a crime in Ohio, juvenile court judges must determine whether to detain the child pretrial in a juvenile jail or permit the child to go home to await trial. Whereas alleged adult offenders have the right to pay a monetary bond to be released from jail pretrial, juveniles have no such right. Thus, once a judge makes the decision to detain a juvenile pretrial—prior to being adjudicated delinquent of any crime—it is difficult for that decision to be undone. While incarcerated, juveniles suffer irreversible psychological, emotional, mental, and social harms, despite juvenile courts …


It Is Time To Get Back To Basics On The Border, Donna Coltharp Oct 2020

It Is Time To Get Back To Basics On The Border, Donna Coltharp

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.


State V. Violette: Harsher Resentencing Encounters A Bolder Resumption Of Vindictiveness, Thomas C. Bradley Apr 2020

State V. Violette: Harsher Resentencing Encounters A Bolder Resumption Of Vindictiveness, Thomas C. Bradley

Maine Law Review

Twenty-one years ago, in Weeks v. State, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, adopted a rule to prevent judicial vindictiveness when resentencing defendants who had successfully appealed their conviction and been reconvicted. The Weeks court adopted as a state due process protection the United States Supreme Court's rule laid down the preceding year in North Carolina v. Pearce. The Pearce rule provides that harsher resentencing of such defendants creates a presumption of constitutionally prohibited vindictiveness unless the harsher sentence is explicitly based on some identifiable misconduct by the defendant since the prior sentencing. Thus, the Law …


Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division Jul 2019

Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process People V. Scott (Decided June 5, 1996) Jul 2019

Due Process People V. Scott (Decided June 5, 1996)

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process Court Of Appeals Jul 2019

Due Process Court Of Appeals

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Finality Of A Conviction: A Noncitizen's Right To Procedural Due Process, Daniela Mondragon Jan 2018

Finality Of A Conviction: A Noncitizen's Right To Procedural Due Process, Daniela Mondragon

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming


Procedural Due Process Claims, Erwin Chemerinsky Jun 2017

Procedural Due Process Claims, Erwin Chemerinsky

Erwin Chemerinsky

No abstract provided.


Are There Really "Plenty Of Shapiros Out There"? A Comment On The Courage Of Norma L. Shapiro, Reid K. Weisbord, David A. Hoffman Apr 2017

Are There Really "Plenty Of Shapiros Out There"? A Comment On The Courage Of Norma L. Shapiro, Reid K. Weisbord, David A. Hoffman

All Faculty Scholarship

Norma Levy Shapiro, a trailblazing United States District Court Judge whose tenure on the Philadelphia federal bench spanned nearly 40 years, died July 22, 2016. This memoriam, written by two former law clerks, reflects fondly on Judge Shapiro’s judicial courage to follow her conscience even when doing so required making deeply unpopular decisions. To illustrate, this memoriam examines three of Judge Shapiro’s most memorable cases from her notable prisoner litigation docket.

First, in Harris v. Pernsley, Judge Shapiro’s principled but polarizing decisions in the Philadelphia prison overcrowding litigation elicited a now-familiar brand of snark from one (tremendous! but imperfectly …


“Criminal Records” - A Comparative Approach, Sigmund A. Cohn Jun 2016

“Criminal Records” - A Comparative Approach, Sigmund A. Cohn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.


Procedural Due Process Claims, Erwin Chemerinsky Apr 2016

Procedural Due Process Claims, Erwin Chemerinsky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Lawrence V. Texas: The Decision And Its Implications For The Future, Martin A. Schwartz Dec 2014

Lawrence V. Texas: The Decision And Its Implications For The Future, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma E. Marouf Aug 2014

Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma E. Marouf

Fatma E Marouf

This Article challenges the constitutionality of indiscriminately restraining civil immigration detainees during removal proceedings. Not only are immigration detainees routinely placed in handcuffs, leg irons, and belly chains without any individualized determination of the need for restraints, but Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the prosecuting party, makes the decisions about the use of restraints, rather than the judge. After examining the rationale for the well-established prohibition against the indiscriminate use of restraints during criminal and civil jury trials, and discussing how some courts have extended this rationale to bench trials, this Article contends that ICE’s practice violates substantive and procedural …


Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma Marouf Aug 2014

Immigrants Unshackled: The Unconstitutional Use Of Indiscriminate Restraints, Fatma Marouf

Fatma Marouf

This Article challenges the constitutionality of indiscriminately restraining civil immigration detainees during removal proceedings. Not only are immigration detainees routinely placed in handcuffs, leg irons, and belly chains without any individualized determination of the need for restraints, but Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the prosecuting party, makes the decisions about the use of restraints, rather than the judge. After examining the rationale for the well-established prohibition against the indiscriminate use of restraints during criminal and civil jury trials, and discussing how some courts have extended this rationale to bench trials, this Article contends that ICE’s practice violates substantive and procedural …


Book Review, David S. Tanenhaus Jan 1999

Book Review, David S. Tanenhaus

Scholarly Works

In his engaging The Supreme Court and Juvenile Justice, political scientist Christopher P. Manfredi argues that Americans in the 1990s are still feeling the powerful and unintended consequences of a trilogy of Supreme Court decisions, Kent v. United States (1966), In re Gault (1967), and In re Winship (1970). In Gault, the most famous of these cases, Justice Abe Fortas announced that it was time for the “constitutional domestication” of the nation’s juvenile courts and began this process by extending limited due process protection to offenders during adjudicatory hearings. Fortas believed that these protections would shield juveniles from unlimited …


What's Happening With Respect To The Second Circuit, Hon. George C. Pratt Jan 1995

What's Happening With Respect To The Second Circuit, Hon. George C. Pratt

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Section 1983 Litigation, Martin A. Schwartz Jan 1995

Section 1983 Litigation, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process Jan 1991

Due Process

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process Jan 1991

Due Process

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process Jan 1991

Due Process

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process Jan 1991

Due Process

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Speech Or Debate Clause Jan 1991

Speech Or Debate Clause

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Where To Draw The Guideline: Factoring The Fruits Of Illegal Searches Into Sentencing Guidelines Calculations, Cheryl G. Bader, David S. Douglas Jan 1990

Where To Draw The Guideline: Factoring The Fruits Of Illegal Searches Into Sentencing Guidelines Calculations, Cheryl G. Bader, David S. Douglas

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Constitutional Law - Public Trial In Criminal Cases, Carl S. Krueger S.Ed. Nov 1953

Constitutional Law - Public Trial In Criminal Cases, Carl S. Krueger S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

The criminal trial has been traditionally open to the public in Anglo-Saxon procedure, as it was in Roman and other civilized societies of an earlier time. The public trial of today, however, has been subjected to considerable criticism on the ground that there is a tendency for criminal trials to degenerate into public spectacles, frequently interrupting the orderly procedure of justice, and not infrequently actually prejudicing the accused. If no useful purpose is served by the presence of the idle public during the deadly serious determination of guilt or innocence, should not the judge, subject to the right of admittance …