Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Admissibility (1)
- Berghuis v. Thompkins (1)
- Burger (Warren) (1)
- Confrontation Clause (1)
- Crawford v. Washington (1)
-
- Cross-examination (1)
- Custodial interrogations (1)
- Dickerson v. United States (1)
- Due process (1)
- Exclusionary rule (1)
- Harris v. New York (1)
- Hearsay (1)
- History (1)
- Impeachment (1)
- Michigan v. Tucker (1)
- Miranda v. Arizona (1)
- Nominations (1)
- Police (1)
- Rehnquist (William) (1)
- Searches and Seizures (1)
- Sixth Amendment (1)
- Testimonial (1)
- Testimony (1)
- Voluntary nature (1)
- Warren (Earl) (1)
- Warren Court (1)
- Witnesses (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Judges
The Rise, Decline And Fall(?) Of Miranda, Yale Kamisar
The Rise, Decline And Fall(?) Of Miranda, Yale Kamisar
Articles
There has been a good deal of talk lately to the effect that Miranda1 is dead or dying-or might as well be dead.2 Even liberals have indicated that the death of Miranda might not be a bad thing. This brings to mind a saying by G.K. Chesterton: "Don't ever take a fence down until you know the reason why it was put up."4
Crawford Surprises: Mostly Unpleasant, Richard D. Friedman
Crawford Surprises: Mostly Unpleasant, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Crawford v. Washington should not have been surprising. The Confrontation Clause guarantees a criminal defendant the right "to be confronted with the witnesses against him." The doctrine of Ohio v. Roberts, treating the clause as a general proscription against the admission of hearsay-except hearsay that fits within a "firmly rooted" exception or is otherwise deemed reliable-had so little to do with the constitutional text, or with the history or principle behind it, that eventually it was bound to be discarded. And the appeal of a testimonial approach to the clause seemed sufficiently strong to yield high hopes that ultimately the …