Digital Commons Network^™

Murray V. Giarratano: Right To Counsel In Postconviction Proceedings In Death Penalty Cases, Alice Mcgill

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered V. United States: Supreme Court Approves Attorney Fee Foreiture, 23 J. Marshall L. Rev. 471 (1990), Stephen M. Kightlinger

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Addressing The Needs Of Attorneys For The Damned, Sean O'Brien

Faculty Works

This article is an introduction to the UMKC Law Review symposium issue dedicated to exploring the topic of capital punishment. UMKC Professor of Law Sean O’Brien shares how the growing importance of capital litigation makes this a timely and appropriate subject for consideration and shares how the university and the Law Review's attention to the death penalty debate contributes to more than just academic discussion.

Constitutionality Without Wisdom: Caplin &(And) Drysdale And Monsanto Examined, Dawn Cartwright

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Gideon V. Wainwright Revisited: What Does The Right To Counsel Guarantee Today?, Michael B. Mushlin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In Gideon v. Wainwright, the Supreme Court unanimously held that indigent state felony defendants are constitutionally entitled to the appointment of trial counsel. The opinion aroused wide support, and even enthusiasm, almost from the moment it was announced in 1963. Two and a half decades later this support has not diminished. However, are the words of praise only lip service to the noble idea of the right to counsel? Has Gideon really made a difference? Has its promise of a fair shake for poor criminal defendants been kept, or has Gideon meant only that defendants are provided with the fleeting …

Court-Appointed Attorneys: Old Problems And New Solutions, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

No abstract provided.

A Step Towards Fairness In Capital Litigation: Missouri Resource Center, Sean O'Brien

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - First Amendment - Federal Requirement That Cattle Producers Fund Statutorily Created Cattlemen's Board And Beef Promotion Operating Committee Does Not Violate Free Speech Or Associational Rights, Paul Snitzer

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

The Constitutional Right To Expert Assistance For Indigents In Civil Cases, David Medine

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Shutting Down The Government, Alan L. Feld

Faculty Scholarship

Actions of the federal government cost money. Legislative processes that specify the amounts and purposes of governmental expenditures control the scope and content of government actions.¹ To paraphrase Chief Justice Marshall, the power to withhold spending involves the power to destroy.²

Those involved in the legislative process ordinarily do not engage in wholesale or sudden dismantling of government activities through unheralded failures to provide funds. While disputes over funding constitute a regular part of the nation's political activity, these controversies usually concern adjustments in the level of spending and of agency operations. A decision to terminate an agency …

Who’S Afraid Of The Sanction Wolf: Imposing Sanctions On Pro Se Litigants, Donalda Gillies

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Capital Post-Conviction Petitioners' Right To Counsel: Integrating Access To Court Doctrine And Due Process Principles, Michael Millemann

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Regulation Of Targeted Direct-Mail Solicitation By Attorneys After Shapero - A Proposed Rule Of Conduct, Ralph J. Mauro

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Passion In Legal Argument And Judicial Decisionmaking: A Comment On Goldberg V. Kelly, Stephen Wizner

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Financing Uncompensated Care: An Approach To The Issues, James F. Blumstein

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Developments In Maryland Law, 1986-87 Survey: Constitutional Law, Eric Easton, Lori A. Reinhold, Joseph B. Tétrault

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Preclusion And Procedural Due Process In Rule 23(B)(2) Class Actions, Mark C. Weber

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Article examines whether Rule 23(b)(2) violates the procedural due process rights of absent class members by binding them to the judgment in a class case without notice of the suit. It concludes that the Rule almost certainly violates due process and proposes a reform that would permit nonbinding class actions similar to the old "spurious" class suits.

Management And Marketing Of Indian Water: From Conflict To Pragmatism, David H. Getches

Publications

No abstract provided.

Gideon's Shelter: The Need To Recognize A Right To Counsel For Indigent Defendants In Eviction Proceedings, Andrew Scherer

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Citrin V. Disciplinary Court Of The Bar Association In The District Of Tel Aviv, Meir Shamgar

Translated Opinions

Facts: The two consolidated appeals requested the cancellation of fines imposed upon reporters who refused to reveal their sources of information upon being subpoenaed to testify before the District Disciplinary Court of the Israeli Bar Association. The main issue was whether the two reporters had an obligation to answer questions regarding their sources, or whether they enjoyed a privilege allowing them to refuse.

Held: The Court noted that there is no Israeli statute explicitly granting immunity to reporters and that such an immunity is not included in the 5731/1971 Evidence Ordinance, which does acknowledge other privileges. After considering the development …

Comments: Blasting The Cap: Constitutional Issues Arising From Maryland's Limitation Of Noneconomic Damages In Personal Injury Claims, James R. Andersen

University of Baltimore Law Review

A topic of fervent debate in recent years has been the growing crisis in personal injury liability insurance, particularly in the area of medical malpractice. Insurers, doctors, and lawyers have presented differing theories as to the cause and solution of the problem. In 1986, the Maryland General Assembly sought to resolve the crisis by limiting the amount recoverable for noneconomic damages in a personal injury action to $350,000. Similar provisions in other states have been struck down as unconstitutional. This comment examines the constitutionality of Maryland's noneconomic damages limitation and argues that the damage limitation violates both the state and …

Constitutional Limitations On Tort Reform: Have The State Courts Placed Insurmountable Obstacles In The Path Of Legislative Responses To The Perceived Liability Insurance Crisis, Richard C. Turkington

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

United States V. Harvey: Are Criminal Defense Fees More Vulnerable Than Necessary?, Eric B. Easton

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bounds And Beyond: A Need To Reevaluate The Right Of Prison Access To The Courts, Steven D. Hinckley

Faculty Scholarship

The author argues that the 1977 United States Supreme Court decision in Bounds v. Smith insufficiently protects the right of prisoners to represent themselves before the courts by failing to require state and federal correctional facilities to establish and maintain adequately stocked prison law libraries and to provide prisoners with the option to use those libraries as their means of gaining meaningful access to the courts.

Symposium On Federalism And Constitutional Checks And Balances: A Safeguard Of Minority And Individual Rights, Roger J. Miner '56

Constitutional Law

No abstract provided.

En El Nombre De Dios--The Sanctuary Movement: Development And Potential For First Amendment Protection, Carl W. Levander

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Nix V. Whiteside: The Lawyer's Role In Reponse To Perjury, James R. Mccall

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Zauderer V. Office Of Disciplinary Counsel: Refining The Regulation Of Attorney Advertising, Brent P. Copenhaver

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The First Amendment, Commercial Speech, And The Advertising Lawyer, Justice Vernon R. Pearson, Michael O'Neill

Seattle University Law Review

The Supreme Court, in a few cases scattered over several decades, has implied the existence of a public right to a free flow of information as one facet of the freedom of speech; yet the Court has refrained from specifically basing a decision on any such right. But with the recent line of commercial speech decisions, the concept-of a public right to a free flow of information has become firmly established and merits detailed examination. That right, and the rationale of the Court in its commercial speech cases, may have far ranging implications. This Article explores these implications in three …

Scrutinizing Lawyer Advertising And Solicitation Rules Under Commercial Speech And Antitrust Doctrine, Judith L. Maute

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.