Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Admissibility (2)
- Evidence (2)
- African American (1)
- And Regions; Legal History (1)
- Areas (1)
-
- Brown v. Mississippi (1)
- Carmichael (1)
- Confessions (1)
- Congress (1)
- Criminal law (1)
- Criminal law committee (1)
- Custodial interrogations (1)
- Daubert hearing (1)
- Daubert test (1)
- Death penalty (1)
- Defendants; Legal Practice and Procedure; Due Process; Constitutional Law (1)
- Due Process Clause (1)
- Due process (1)
- Economic crime (1)
- Economic crime offenders (1)
- Economics (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- Federal court (1)
- Federal rules of evidence (1)
- Federal sentencing guidelines (1)
- Federalism (1)
- Generally; Fourteenth Amendment; Preventive Detention; Criminal Law and Procedure; Israel; Countries (1)
- History (1)
- Jim Crow (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Legal History
Where Hannah Arendt Went Wrong, David Abraham
The Racial Origins Of Modern Criminal Procedure, Michael J. Klarman
The Racial Origins Of Modern Criminal Procedure, Michael J. Klarman
Michigan Law Review
The constitutional law of state criminal procedure was born between the First and Second World Wars. Prior to 1920, the Supreme Court had upset the results of the state criminal justice system in just a handful of cases, all involving race discrimination in jury selection. By 1940, however, the Court had interpreted the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to invalidate state criminal convictions in a wide variety of settings: mob-dominated trials, violation of the right to counsel, coerced confessions, financially-biased judges, and knowingly perjured testimony by prosecution witnesses. In addition, the Court had broadened its earlier decisions forbidding …
Editor's Observations: The 2001 Economic Crime Package: A Legislative History, Frank O. Bowman Iii
Editor's Observations: The 2001 Economic Crime Package: A Legislative History, Frank O. Bowman Iii
Faculty Publications
On April 6, 2001, the U.S. Sentencing Commission approved a group of amendments to guidelines governing the sentencing of economic crimes. These measures, collectively known to as the “economic crime package,” are the culmination of some six years of deliberations by both the Conaboy and Murphy Sentencing Commissions working together with interested outside groups such as the defense bar, the Justice Department, probation officers, and the Criminal Law Committee of the U.S. Judicial Conference, The package contains three basic components. First, the now-separate theft and fraud guidelines, Sections 2B1.1 and 2F1.1, will be consolidated into a single guideline. Second, the …
My Lai: An American Tragedy, William G. Eckhardt
Kumho Tire Co. V. Carmichael: The Supreme Court Follows Up On The Daubert Test, Martin A. Schwartz
Kumho Tire Co. V. Carmichael: The Supreme Court Follows Up On The Daubert Test, Martin A. Schwartz
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Without Fear Or Favor: Judge James Edwin Horton And The Trial Of The Scottsboro Boys, Douglas O. Linder
Without Fear Or Favor: Judge James Edwin Horton And The Trial Of The Scottsboro Boys, Douglas O. Linder
Faculty Works
No abstract provided.
Positivism And The Notion Of An Offense, Claire Oakes Finkelstein
Positivism And The Notion Of An Offense, Claire Oakes Finkelstein
All Faculty Scholarship
While the United States Supreme Court has developed an elaborate constitutional jurisprudence of criminal procedure, it has articulated few constitutional doctrines of the substantive criminal law. The asymmetry between substance and procedure seems natural given the demise of Lochner and the minimalist stance towards due process outside the area of fundamental rights. This Article, however, argues that the "positivistic" approach to defining criminal offenses stands in some tension with other basic principles, both constitutional and moral. In particular, two important constitutional guarantees depend on the notion of an offense: the presumption of innocence and the ban on double jeopardy. Under …
"Can (Did) Congress 'Overrule' Miranda?, Yale Kamisar
"Can (Did) Congress 'Overrule' Miranda?, Yale Kamisar
Articles
I think the great majority of judges, lawyers, and law professors would have concurred in Judge Friendly's remarks when he made them thirty-three years ago. To put it another way, I believe few would have had much confidence in the constitutionality of an anti-Miranda provision, usually known as § 3501 because of its designation under Title 18 of the United States Code, a provision of Title II of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Crime Act or the Crime Bill), when that legislation was signed by the president on June 19, …