Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 30
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Army Commander’S Role—The Judge, Jury, & Prosecutor For The Article 15, Anthony Godwin
Army Commander’S Role—The Judge, Jury, & Prosecutor For The Article 15, Anthony Godwin
Seattle University Law Review
Service members in the armed forces are bound by a different set of rules when compared to other U.S. citizens. Some of the normal safeguards and protections that civilians enjoy are much more restrictive for military service members, and this is generally for a good reason. Such restrictions are partly due to the complex demands and needs of the United States military. Congress and the President have entrusted military commanders with special powers that enable them to handle minor violations of law without needing to go through a full judicial proceeding. Non-judicial punishments (NJP), also known as Article 15s, are …
From The Frontlines Of The Modern Movement To End Forced Arbitration And Restore Jury Rights, F. Paul Bland, Myriam Gilles, Tanuja Gupta
From The Frontlines Of The Modern Movement To End Forced Arbitration And Restore Jury Rights, F. Paul Bland, Myriam Gilles, Tanuja Gupta
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
Introduction To Reviving The American Jury, Nancy S. Marder
Introduction To Reviving The American Jury, Nancy S. Marder
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
How To Talk So Juries Will Listen, Janet Randall
How To Talk So Juries Will Listen, Janet Randall
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
Bye, Bye, Bilinguals: The Removal Of English- Spanish Bilinguals From The Criminal Jury And Latino Discrimination, Ashley Rich
Bye, Bye, Bilinguals: The Removal Of English- Spanish Bilinguals From The Criminal Jury And Latino Discrimination, Ashley Rich
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
Mirror, Mirror, On The Wall—Biased Impartiality, Appearances, And The Need For Recusal Reform, Zygmont A. Pines
Mirror, Mirror, On The Wall—Biased Impartiality, Appearances, And The Need For Recusal Reform, Zygmont A. Pines
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
The article focuses on a troubling aspect of contemporary judicial morality.
Impartiality—and the appearance of impartiality—are the foundation of judicial decision-making, judicial morality, and the public’s trust in the rule of law. Recusal, in which a jurist voluntarily removes himself or herself from participating in a case, is a process that attempts to preserve and promote the substance and the appearance of judicial impartiality. Nevertheless, the traditional common law recusal process, prevalent in many of our state court systems, manifestly subverts basic legal and ethical norms.
Today’s recusal practice—whether rooted in unintentional hypocrisy, wishful thinking, or a pathological cognitive dissonance— …
Just How Reliable Is The Human Memory? The Admissibility Of Recovered Repressed Memories In Criminal Proceedings, Shannon L. Malone
Just How Reliable Is The Human Memory? The Admissibility Of Recovered Repressed Memories In Criminal Proceedings, Shannon L. Malone
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Judges Do It Better: Why Judges Can (And Should) Decide Life Or Death, Andrew R. Ford
Judges Do It Better: Why Judges Can (And Should) Decide Life Or Death, Andrew R. Ford
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
Following its decision in Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court of the United States has attempted to standardize procedures that states use to subject offenders to the ultimate penalty. In practice, this attempt at standardization has divided capital sentencing into two distinct parts: the death eligibility decision and the death selection decision. The eligibility decision addresses whether the sentencer may impose the death penalty, while the selection decision determines who among that limited subset of eligible offenders is sentenced to death. In Ring v. Arizona, the Court held for the first time that the Sixth Amendment right to …
Artificial Intelligence And Role-Reversible Judgment, Stephen E. Henderson, Kiel Brennan-Marquez
Artificial Intelligence And Role-Reversible Judgment, Stephen E. Henderson, Kiel Brennan-Marquez
Stephen E Henderson
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The , James L. Kainen
James L. Kainen
Crawford v. Washington’s historical approach to the confrontation clause establishes that testimonial hearsay inadmissible without confrontation at the founding is similarly inadmissible today, despite whether it fits a subsequently developed hearsay exception. Consequently, the requirement of confrontation depends upon whether an out-of-court statement is hearsay, testimonial, and, if so, whether it was nonetheless admissible without confrontation at the founding. A substantial literature has developed about whether hearsay statements are testimonial or were, like dying declarations, otherwise admissible at the founding. In contrast, this article focuses on the first question – whether statements are hearsay – which scholars have thus far …
Ghana’S Jury System On Trial, Dennis D. Adjei
Ghana’S Jury System On Trial, Dennis D. Adjei
Duke Law Master of Judicial Studies Theses
Civil cases in Ghana are tried by the bench. Criminal cases are also handled by bench trials, except for certain indictable offenses, which may be tried by a judge or jury. Not all serious offenses are tried by jury. And a trend is developing away from jury to bench trials. For example, treason is punishable by death, but the case is determined in a bench trial by three High Court Judges. Robbery, which had been an indictable offense, is now tried by either jury or bench trial at the discretion of the Attorney-General; and prosecutors consistently have been opting for …
The Jury Wants To Take The Podium -- But Even With The Authority To Do So, Can It? An Interdisciplinary Examination Of Jurors' Questioning Of Witnesses At Trial, Mitchell J. Frank
The Jury Wants To Take The Podium -- But Even With The Authority To Do So, Can It? An Interdisciplinary Examination Of Jurors' Questioning Of Witnesses At Trial, Mitchell J. Frank
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Holmes And The Common Law: A Jury's Duty, Matthew P. Cline
Holmes And The Common Law: A Jury's Duty, Matthew P. Cline
Matthew P Cline
The notion of a small group of peers whose responsibility it is to play a part in determining the outcome of a trial is central to the common conception of the American legal system. Memorialized in the Constitution of the United States as a fundamental right, and in the national consciousness as the proud, if begrudged, duty of all citizens, juries are often discussed, but perhaps not always understood. Whatever misunderstandings have come to be, certainly many of them sprang from the juxtaposition of jury and judge. Why do we have both? How are their responsibilities divided? Who truly decides …
The Propriety Of Jury Questioning: A Remedy For Perceived Harmless Error, Laurie Forbes Neff
The Propriety Of Jury Questioning: A Remedy For Perceived Harmless Error, Laurie Forbes Neff
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler
Faculty Scholarship
Crawford v. Washington’s historical approach to the confrontation clause establishes that testimonial hearsay inadmissible without confrontation at the founding is similarly inadmissible today, despite whether it fits a subsequently developed hearsay exception. Consequently, the requirement of confrontation depends upon whether an out-of-court statement is hearsay, testimonial, and, if so, whether it was nonetheless admissible without confrontation at the founding. A substantial literature has developed about whether hearsay statements are testimonial or were, like dying declarations, otherwise admissible at the founding. In contrast, this article focuses on the first question – whether statements are hearsay – which scholars have thus far …
The “Csi Effect”: Better Jurors Through Television And Science?, Michael D. Mann
The “Csi Effect”: Better Jurors Through Television And Science?, Michael D. Mann
ExpressO
This Comment discusses how television shows such as CSI and Law & Order create heightened juror expectations. This will be published in the Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal's 2005-2006 issue.
Reconciling The Booker Conflict: A Substantive Sixth Amendment In A Real Offense Sentencing System, Bertrall L. Ross
Reconciling The Booker Conflict: A Substantive Sixth Amendment In A Real Offense Sentencing System, Bertrall L. Ross
Bertrall L Ross
No abstract provided.
Section 1983 Litigation, Martin A. Schwartz
Calmer Seas: The Supreme Court's Major Criminal Law Rulings Of The 1993-94 Term, William E. Hellerstein
Calmer Seas: The Supreme Court's Major Criminal Law Rulings Of The 1993-94 Term, William E. Hellerstein
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Voir Dire In Kentucky: An Empirical Study Of Voir Dire In Kentucky Circuit Courts, William H. Fortune
Voir Dire In Kentucky: An Empirical Study Of Voir Dire In Kentucky Circuit Courts, William H. Fortune
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
Voir dire is the stage of a jury trial at which prospective jurors are questioned under oath by court or counsel to determine their suitability as jurors in the case to be tried. Kentucky's high court has repeatedly recognized the importance of voir dire to the exercise of for-cause and peremptory challenges.
The trial judge's wide discretion in voir dire, however, necessarily makes a review of appellate decisions of minimal assistance in ascertaining what actually occurs during this important phase of a jury trial. Published opinions provide little guidance in this area; information about voir dire must come from a …
Misconduct Of Judges And Attorneys During Trial: Informal Sanctions, Charles W. Ehrhardt
Misconduct Of Judges And Attorneys During Trial: Informal Sanctions, Charles W. Ehrhardt
Scholarly Publications
No abstract provided.
Mr. Justice Murphy And Civil Rights, Thurgood Marshall
Mr. Justice Murphy And Civil Rights, Thurgood Marshall
Michigan Law Review
There is constant danger that the unpopularity of an individual, or of the group of which he is a member, will be reflected in dealings with his rights by his neighbors or by the organized community. In America today this bias is most likely to stern from differences of race, origin, nationality, or religious or political belief. Prejudice may victimize an entire group or any of its members. Any charge of shocking or anti-social conduct against one who is already thus unpopular increases the likelihood of unfair treatment. Not only private citizens, but legislators, judges and administrative officers of government …