A Comparison Of Public Defenders Vs. Private Attorneys, 2021 Merrimack College
A Comparison Of Public Defenders Vs. Private Attorneys, Tiffany Costello
Honors Senior Capstone Projects
This study seeks to determine whether there are any differences in conviction rates or client satisfaction between public defenders and private attorneys in state or federal courts. Although researchers have spent time examining differences between attorney type and client satisfaction or conviction rates, little information exists on the assessment of attorney type in the federal system. The study will consist of a two-part survey with approximately twenty-seven closed-ended questions about client satisfaction, conviction, court, and attorney type. The target population will be any criminal defendant in federal or state court with an attorney. In this study, the sampling method will ...
Environmental Law, 2021 Allard School of Law at the University of British Columbia
Environmental Law, Jocelyn Stacey
In commemoration of their 50th anniversary, this chapter examines the Federal Courts’ role in shaping environmental law in Canada. The chapter uses well-known environmental principles – the precautionary principle, sustainable development and access to (environmental) justice – as focal points for examining environmental law as well as the legal culture of the Federal Courts. The chapter identifies four distinct interpretive roles that the Federal Courts have ascribed to the precautionary principle and it argues that three of these roles have the potential to generate more coherent and transparent doctrine that upholds the rule of law in the environmental context. In contrast, chapter ...
Fair Play: Notes On The Algorithmic Soccer Referee, 2021 University of Pittsburgh School of Law
Fair Play: Notes On The Algorithmic Soccer Referee, Michael J. Madison
The soccer referee stands in for a judge. Soccer’s Video Assistant Referee (“VAR”) system stands in for algorithms that augment human deciders. Fair play stands in for justice. They are combined and set in a polycentric system of governance, with implications for designing, administering, and assessing human-machine combinations.
The Impact Of Cultural Heritage On Japanese Towns And Villages, 2020 University of Tsukuba
The Impact Of Cultural Heritage On Japanese Towns And Villages, Yuichiro Tsuji Dr.
Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental & Innovation Law
In 1954, when historically significant clays and clay pots were found in the Iba district of Shizuoka prefecture, the city applied to the prefectural education committee for a historic site designation. The committee granted this designation to the city..
However, in 1973 the education committee lifted its permission to promote development around the location. Historians have sought revocation of this decision under the Administrative Case Litigation Act (ACLA), but the Supreme Court has denied standing. By denying standing, the Japanese Supreme Court allows the prefecture to destroy a historical site.
First, this paper seeks to discuss the doctrine of standing ...
Fee-Shifting Statutes And Compensation For Risk, 2020 University of Michigan
Fee-Shifting Statutes And Compensation For Risk, Maureen Carroll
Indiana Law Journal
A law firm that enters into a contingency arrangement provides the client with more than just its attorneys’ labor. It also provides a form of financing, because the firm will be paid (if at all) only after the litigation ends; and insurance, because if the litigation results in a low recovery (or no recovery at all), the firm will absorb the direct and indirect costs of the litigation. Courts and markets routinely pay for these types of risk-bearing services through a range of mechanisms, including state feeshifting statutes, contingent percentage fees, common-fund awards, alternative fee arrangements, and third-party litigation funding ...
The Pandemic Juror, 2020 University of Tennessee College of Law
The Pandemic Juror, Melanie D. Wilson
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
While the deadly and highly contagious COVID-19 virus lingers and spreads across the country, courts are resuming criminal jury trials. In moving forward, judges reference case backlogs, speedy trial rights, and other concerns for the rights of the accused. Overlooked in this calculus is the importance of jurors and their safety. The Sixth Amendment guarantees “the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury.” Without jurors, there is no justice.
Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, the justice system sometimes took advantage of juror vulnerability, treating jurors callously, if not rudely, during voir dire by asking them intensely ...
Unbuckling The Seat Belt Defense In Arkansas, 2020 University of Arkansas
Unbuckling The Seat Belt Defense In Arkansas, Spencer G. Dougherty
Arkansas Law Review
The “seat belt defense” has been hotly litigated over the decades in numerous jurisdictions across the United States. It is an affirmative defense that, when allowed, reduces a plaintiff’s recovery for personal injuries resulting from an automobile collision where the defendant can establish that those injuries would have been less severe or avoided entirely had the plaintiff been wearing an available seat belt. This is an unsettled legal issue in Arkansas, despite the growing number of cases in which the seat belt defense is raised as an issue. Most jurisdictions, including Arkansas, initially rejected the defense, but the basis ...
Doj Blows The Whistle On Professional Whistleblowers: But The Circuits Are Split On Whether Dismissals Will Be Swift, 2020 Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law
Doj Blows The Whistle On Professional Whistleblowers: But The Circuits Are Split On Whether Dismissals Will Be Swift, Jennifer Harchut
Villanova Law Review
No abstract provided.
Table Of Contents, 2020 Seattle University School of Law
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents
Revisiting The Precedential Status Of Crown Court Decisions, 2020 Singapore Management University
Revisiting The Precedential Status Of Crown Court Decisions, Kwan Ho Lau
Research Collection School Of Law
The binding authority of substantive decisions made by the Crown Court in the exercise of its criminal jurisdiction is often assumed to be negligible. In 2013, the Court of Appeal appeared to confirm the correctness of that assumption. Yet there was little in the way of explanation or case law that was cited in support by the court. This article suggests that a re-evaluation of the place and treatment of such decisions within the doctrine of precedent is overdue, and considers that they should be recognised to have some binding effect if there is able to be established a reasonably ...
Must A Friend Indeed Reveal A Friend’S Misdeed? Exploring The Merits Of A Friendship Privilege, 2020 St. Mary's University
Must A Friend Indeed Reveal A Friend’S Misdeed? Exploring The Merits Of A Friendship Privilege, Michael D. Moberly
St. Mary's Law Journal
Restoring The Presumption Of Innocence: Protecting A Defendant’S Right To A Fair Trial By Closing The Door On 404(B) Evidence, 2020 St. Mary's University School of Law
Restoring The Presumption Of Innocence: Protecting A Defendant’S Right To A Fair Trial By Closing The Door On 404(B) Evidence, Aaron Diaz
St. Mary's Law Journal
Congress enacted the Federal Rules of Evidence to govern evidentiary procedures and “eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay.” In criminal cases, for example, Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) seeks to prevent prosecutors from improperly introducing a defendant’s past misdeeds. Nevertheless, prosecutors often attempt to introduce a defendant’s past misconduct to suggest that a defendant has a propensity to commit crimes, which is improper character evidence. Unsurprisingly, 404(b) is one of the most litigated evidence rules and has generated more published opinions than any other subsections of the Rules. And despite efforts to amend Rule 404(b), the ...
And Justice For None: How Covid-19 Is Crippling The Criminal Jury Right, 2020 University of Houston Law Center
And Justice For None: How Covid-19 Is Crippling The Criminal Jury Right, Brandon Marc Draper
Boston College Law Review
The jury trial is the cornerstone of the criminal justice system in the United States. Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, however, access to fair and constitutional jury trials has largely come to a halt. Courts correctly decided to stop all jury trials and other in-person proceedings as the nation learned more about a new and deadly virus. Nevertheless, this decision denied access to an important constitutional right. In response, some courts employed video conference technology such as Zoom and WebEx to conduct arraignments, general court appearances, and some pretrial hearings. Six months into the pandemic, some criminal courts are beginning to ...
How Medicalization Of Civil Rights Could Disappoint, 2020 University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
How Medicalization Of Civil Rights Could Disappoint, Allison K. Hoffman
Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law
This essay reflects on Craig Konnoth’s recent Article, Medicalization and the New Civil Rights, which is a carefully crafted and thought-provoking description of the refashioning of civil rights claims into medical rights frameworks. He compellingly threads together many intellectual traditions—from antidiscrimination law to disability law to health law—to illustrate the pervasiveness of the phenomenon that he describes and why it might be productive as a tool to advance civil rights.
This response, however, offers several reasons why medicalization may not cure all that ails civil rights litigation’s pains and elaborates on the potential risks of overinvesting ...
Increasing Case Traffic: Expanding The International Criminal Court's Focus On Human Trafficking Cases, 2020 University of Michigan Law School
Increasing Case Traffic: Expanding The International Criminal Court's Focus On Human Trafficking Cases, Nadia Alhadi
Michigan Journal of International Law
Human trafficking falls within the jurisdictional competence of the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) as one of the article 7 crimes against humanity, whether committed in an atmosphere of conflict or in times of relative peace. Despite the ICC’s jurisdiction, as well as the globally pervasive nature of peacetime trafficking in particular, the ICC has not yet heard a human trafficking case.
Accountability at the international level, however, is crucial, and the ICC’s oversight has the potential to fill gaps in the current anti-trafficking regime. This note explores this potential, and then examines whether the text of the Rome ...
Regulating Jurisdiction Collisions In International Law: The Case Of The European Court Of Justice's Exclusive Jurisdiction In Law Of The Sea Disputes, 2020 University of Michigan Law School
Regulating Jurisdiction Collisions In International Law: The Case Of The European Court Of Justice's Exclusive Jurisdiction In Law Of The Sea Disputes, Darío Maestro
Michigan Journal of International Law
To maximize their chances of receiving a favorable disposition, claimants often aspire to bring complex disputes to more than one international court. However, doing so may bring their claims under the jurisdiction of more than one branch of international law simultaneously, creating what this note calls a jurisdiction collision. This practice poses a challenge to the cohesion of international adjudication as competing international tribunals, relying on differing precedents, may give differing interpretations to the same rule.
Concentrating on the classical roots of international law and its changing significance over time and within different contexts, this note considers the benefits and ...
Democracy, Deference, And Compromise: Understanding And Reforming Campaign Finance Jurisprudence, 2020 University of Maine School of Law
Democracy, Deference, And Compromise: Understanding And Reforming Campaign Finance Jurisprudence, Scott P. Bloomberg
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
In Citizens United, the Supreme Court interpreted the government’s interest in preventing corruption as being limited to preventing quid pro quo— cash-for-votes—corruption. This narrow interpretation drastically circumscribed legislatures’ abilities to regulate the financing of elections, in turn prompting scholars to propose a number of reforms for broadening the government interest in campaign finance cases. These reforms include urging the Court to recognize a new government interest such as political equality, to adopt a broader understanding of corruption, and to be more deferential to legislatures in defining corruption.
Building upon that body of scholarship, this Article begins with a ...
The Need For A Historical Exception To Grand Jury Secrecy In The Federal Rules Of Criminal Procedure, 2020 Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School
The Need For A Historical Exception To Grand Jury Secrecy In The Federal Rules Of Criminal Procedure, Daniel Aronsohn
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
The "Directive" Prong: Adding To The Allied-Signal Framework For Remand Without Vacatur, 2020 University of Michigan Law School
The "Directive" Prong: Adding To The Allied-Signal Framework For Remand Without Vacatur, T. Alex B. Folkerth
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
“Remand without vacatur” is an administrative law remedy that allows courts reviewing agency actions with minor legal defects to leave the action in place while the agency fixes the defect. Courts use a two-prong test from the 1993 D.C. Circuit case Allied-Signal, Inc. v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to determine whether or not to vacate the action pending remand. Allied-Signal’s “deficiency” prong directs the court to consider how bad the defect is. The “disruption” prong directs the court to consider how much havoc will be wreaked by the vacation of the action while the agency is fixing ...
Dissent, Disagreement And Doctrinal Disarray: Free Expression And The Roberts Court In 2020, 2020 William & Mary Law School
Dissent, Disagreement And Doctrinal Disarray: Free Expression And The Roberts Court In 2020, Clay Calvert
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Using the United States Supreme Court’s 2019 rulings in Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, Nieves v. Bartlett, and Iancu v. Brunetti as analytical springboards, this Article explores multiple fractures among the Justices affecting the First Amendment freedoms of speech and press. All three cases involved dissents, with two cases each spawning five opinions. The clefts compound problems witnessed in 2018 with a pair of five-to-four decisions in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra and Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. Partisan divides, the Article argues, are only one problem with First ...