Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Judges (2)
- Appointed Counsel (1)
- Bias (1)
- Breyer Committee Report (1)
- Courts (1)
-
- Criminal Defense Attorneys (1)
- Criminal Law And Procedure (1)
- Criminal Representation (1)
- Defense (1)
- Ethics (1)
- Federal Courts (1)
- Federal Judges (1)
- Federal Judicial Misconduct Statutes (1)
- Federal rules of evidence (1)
- Indigent Defense (1)
- Judicial Conduct (1)
- Judicial Discipline (1)
- Judicial Ethics (1)
- Judicial Misconduct (1)
- Judicial System (1)
- Judicial conduct (1)
- Judicial misconduct (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Justice system (1)
- Legal Profession (1)
- Mentoring Programs (1)
- National Commission on Judicial Discipline and Removal (1)
- Plea Bargaining (1)
- Politics (1)
- Professional Ethics in Law (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility
Assigned Counsel Mentoring Programs: Results And Lessons From Two Pilot Projects, Susan Saab Fortney
Assigned Counsel Mentoring Programs: Results And Lessons From Two Pilot Projects, Susan Saab Fortney
Faculty Scholarship
Working with a team of three subject matter experts, the National Legal Aid and Defender Association implemented and evaluated two pilot mentoring projects aimed at helping lawyers who serve as assigned counsel. This report discusses the program design, evaluation outcomes, and offers guidance through lessons learned for other jurisdictions interested in introducing assigned counsel mentoring programs. The author of the report was the principal investigator who evaluated the programs.
This project was supported by grant number 2015-AJ-BX-K043 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs to the National Legal Aid and Defender Association. The opinions, findings, and …
Judging During Crises: Can Judges Protect The Facts?, Lissa Griffin
Judging During Crises: Can Judges Protect The Facts?, Lissa Griffin
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
With the advent of instantaneous information and the trend toward shrinking adherence to the truth, the conversation surrounding the ability of judges to conduct outside research into the matters before them is gaining urgency. In a “post-truth” world, the role that the judiciary plays in our democracy must shift from trier of fact to guardian of factual integrity. And to do this, the professional ethics rules assigned to the judiciary may need re-evaluation.
This Essay argues that the judiciary's ambivalence to its role as fact finder must be overcome, and where appropriate, judges may be empowered to seek out supplemental …
Judging Judges Fifty Years After – Was Judge Julius Hoffman’S Conduct So Different?, Bennett L. Gershman
Judging Judges Fifty Years After – Was Judge Julius Hoffman’S Conduct So Different?, Bennett L. Gershman
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
In Chicago, Illinois--and in courtrooms across the United States--judicial misconduct has affected trial outcomes as long as there have been trials. While Judge Julius Hoffman's conduct in the “Chicago Eight” trial is an egregious example of judicial behavior toward criminal defendants, this piece's examination of at least ten different categories of misconduct in dozens of cases makes the argument that misbehavior by judges is less of an exception to the rule of impartiality than the thinking public might know. In considering these brazen examples, practitioners and academics alike can evaluate how to best confront the extent to which conduct like …
Asymmetric Normalcy, Deborah Pearlstein
Asymmetric Normalcy, Deborah Pearlstein
Online Publications
Say what you will about sports metaphors in legal writing, but Professor Mark Tushnet’s “constitutional hardball” descriptor has proven remarkably useful in capturing one of the most vexing political dynamics of our time: the political parties’ resort to “claims and practice…that are without much question within the bounds of existing constitutional doctrine and practice but that are nonetheless in some tension with…the ‘go without saying’ assumptions that underpin working systems of constitutional government.”
Second-Best Criminal Case, William Ortman
Second-Best Criminal Case, William Ortman
Law Faculty Research Publications
No abstract provided.
An Unfinished Dialogue: Congress, The Judiciary, And The Rules For Federal Judicial Misconduct Proceedings, Arthur D. Hellman
An Unfinished Dialogue: Congress, The Judiciary, And The Rules For Federal Judicial Misconduct Proceedings, Arthur D. Hellman
Articles
Federal judges can be impeached and removed from office for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” but what can be done to investigate and remedy less serious misconduct? Congress gave its answer 40 years ago when it passed the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980. The Act emerged from a series of complex interactions between Congress and the judiciary that could hardly be replicated today. Initially there was strong support, particularly in the Senate, for a centralized, “strictly adjudicatory” system, including a provision for removal of judges without impeachment. Over the course of several years, however, the judiciary persuaded Congress to …