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

Jurisprudence Commons

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

1998

Law and Society

Texas Constitution

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence

Texas Rule Of Civil Procedure 166a(I): A New Weapon For Texas Defendants Comment., Robert W. Clore Jan 1998

Texas Rule Of Civil Procedure 166a(I): A New Weapon For Texas Defendants Comment., Robert W. Clore

St. Mary's Law Journal

This Comment analyzes the Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166a(i) for a “no evidence” motion and discusses its likely application in Texas courts. Part II reviews summary judgment practice in federal and Texas state courts in order to determine the likely construction of the new rule. Part III discusses Rule 166a(i) and explores the role of litigation reform in shaping the no-evidence motion. This part also addresses the procedural shortcomings of the new rule and compares Rule 166a(i) with federal summary judgment practice. Part IV assesses whether Rule 166a(i) violates the Texas Constitution by denying citizens the right to a …


The React Security Belt: Stunning Prisoners And Human Rights Groups Into Questioning Whether Its Use Is Permissible Under The United States And Texas Constitutions Comment., Shelley A. Nieto Dahlberg Jan 1998

The React Security Belt: Stunning Prisoners And Human Rights Groups Into Questioning Whether Its Use Is Permissible Under The United States And Texas Constitutions Comment., Shelley A. Nieto Dahlberg

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Remote Electronically Activated Control Technology (REACT) belt infringes upon criminal defendants’ and prisoners’ fundamental rights; therefore, it cannot withstand judicial scrutiny under the United States and Texas Constitutions. This Comment attempts to address and answer issues regarding the REACT belt. The belt constitutes cruel and unusual punishment with the potential to deprive prisoners of their due process rights. The belt disrupts attorney-client communication and destroys a criminal defendant’s presumption of innocence. Furthermore, other alternatives provide effective means to prevent unruly prisoners from destroying the integrity of the courts. Part II of this Comment discusses how the belt works, and …