Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (286)
- UC Law SF (201)
- William & Mary Law School (199)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (139)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (133)
-
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (132)
- American University Washington College of Law (104)
- Seattle University School of Law (92)
- Duke Law (82)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (80)
- UIC School of Law (76)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (76)
- The University of Akron (71)
- Fordham Law School (67)
- Pepperdine University (66)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (61)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (61)
- Columbia Law School (60)
- Georgetown University Law Center (59)
- BLR (57)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (55)
- Florida State University College of Law (54)
- University of Maine School of Law (53)
- Osgoode Hall Law School of York University (52)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (51)
- University of Richmond (49)
- West Virginia University (49)
- Universitas Indonesia (48)
- University of Georgia School of Law (46)
- New York Law School (45)
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional Law (278)
- Constitutional law (260)
- Sixth Amendment (183)
- Constitution (157)
- Supreme Court (147)
-
- Fourth Amendment (135)
- United States Supreme Court (135)
- Due process (128)
- Fifth Amendment (119)
- Eighth Amendment (115)
- Criminal law (112)
- Right to counsel (110)
- Criminal procedure (102)
- Death penalty (100)
- Police (90)
- Capital punishment (82)
- First Amendment (82)
- Criminal Law (72)
- Federalism (72)
- Privacy (70)
- Criminal justice (68)
- Evidence (63)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (62)
- Sentencing (62)
- Due Process (61)
- Fourteenth Amendment (60)
- Self-incrimination (58)
- Civil rights (57)
- Habeas corpus (55)
- Law (55)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Faculty Scholarship (213)
- UC Law Constitutional Quarterly (201)
- Michigan Law Review (141)
- Articles (126)
- Touro Law Review (107)
-
- Faculty Publications (87)
- UIC Law Review (73)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (73)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (72)
- Seattle University Law Review (64)
- Pepperdine Law Review (62)
- Scholarly Works (59)
- William & Mary Law Review (58)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (57)
- ExpressO (54)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (54)
- Maine Law Review (52)
- Indiana Law Journal (50)
- Cardozo Law Review (48)
- West Virginia Law Review (48)
- American University Law Review (42)
- Kentucky Law Journal (40)
- Publications (40)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (40)
- Faculty Articles (39)
- Northwestern University Law Review (39)
- Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan (37)
- Akron Law Review (36)
- Maryland Law Review (36)
- Scholarly Publications (36)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 2881 - 2910 of 3982
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
In The Stationhouse After Dickerson, Charles D. Weisselberg
In The Stationhouse After Dickerson, Charles D. Weisselberg
Michigan Law Review
Miranda v. Arizona established the high water mark of the protections afforded an accused during a custodial interrogation. During the decades that followed, the United States Supreme Court allowed Miranda's foundation to erode, inviting a direct challenge to the landmark ruling. In Dickerson v. United States, the Court turned back such a challenge and placed Miranda upon a more secure, constitutional footing. This Article explores the impact of Dickerson in the place where Miranda was meant to matter most: the stationhouse. As I have described elsewhere, Supreme Court decisions have influenced a number of California law enforcement agencies to instruct …
Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices: How Far Is Too Far?, Laurie Magid
Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices: How Far Is Too Far?, Laurie Magid
Michigan Law Review
Virtually all interrogations - or at least virtually all successful interrogations - involve some deception. As the United States Supreme Court has placed few limits on the use of deception, the variety of deceptive techniques is limited chiefly by the ingenuity of the interrogator. Interrogators still rely on the classic "Mutt and Jeff," or "good cop, bad cop," routine. Interrogators tell suspects that nonexistent eyewitnesses have identified them, or that still at-large accomplices have given statements against them. Interrogators have been known to put an unsophisticated suspect's hand on a fancy, new photocopy machine and tell him that the "Truth …
Miranda'S Failure To Restrain Pernicious Interrogation Practices, Welsh S. White
Miranda'S Failure To Restrain Pernicious Interrogation Practices, Welsh S. White
Michigan Law Review
As Yale Kamisar's writings on police interrogation demonstrate, our simultaneous commitments to promoting law enforcement's interest in obtaining confessions and to protecting individuals from overreaching interrogation practices have created a nearly irreconcilable tension. If the police must be granted authority to engage in effective questioning of suspects, it will obviously be difficult to insure that "the terrible engine of the criminal law . . . not . . . be used to overreach individuals who stand helpless against it." If we are committed to accommodating these conflicting interests, however, some means must be found to impose appropriate restraints on the …
Q: Will The Supreme Court Intervention In Florida Fail The Test Of Time?, Ira Glasser, Alan J. Meese
Q: Will The Supreme Court Intervention In Florida Fail The Test Of Time?, Ira Glasser, Alan J. Meese
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Do As I Say And Not As I Do: Dickerson, Constitutional Common Law And The Imperial Supreme Court, Kevin Mcnamee
Do As I Say And Not As I Do: Dickerson, Constitutional Common Law And The Imperial Supreme Court, Kevin Mcnamee
Fordham Urban Law Journal
This Comment examines the Supreme Court's Miranda jurisprudence through the lens of the "constitutional common law" theory, which suggests that the Supreme Court has crafted a large body of subconstitutional rules that are not compelled by the text of the Constitution but serve to protect values implicit in the text. As a result, such rules are subject to the limitations of modification and nullification by later courts. After presenting the characteristics of the constitutional common law theory and its relationship to federalism and separation of powers, the author suggests that the theory can explain the erosion of Miranda decision's brightline …
Procedural Reforms In Capital Cases Applied To Perjury, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 453 (2001), Steven Clark
Procedural Reforms In Capital Cases Applied To Perjury, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 453 (2001), Steven Clark
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Righting Illinois' Wrongs: Suggestions For Reform And A Call For Abolition, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 469 (2001), Sharone Levy
Righting Illinois' Wrongs: Suggestions For Reform And A Call For Abolition, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 469 (2001), Sharone Levy
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Reasonable Doubt Redux: The Return Of Substantive Criminal Appellate Review In Illinois, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 495 (2001), Stephen L. Richards
Reasonable Doubt Redux: The Return Of Substantive Criminal Appellate Review In Illinois, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 495 (2001), Stephen L. Richards
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Something Is Rotten In The Interrogation Room: Let's Try Video Oversight, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 537 (2001), Wayne T. Westling
Something Is Rotten In The Interrogation Room: Let's Try Video Oversight, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 537 (2001), Wayne T. Westling
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
You Have The Right To Better Safeguards: Looking Beyond Miranda In The New Millennium, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 637 (2001), Mandy Defilippo
You Have The Right To Better Safeguards: Looking Beyond Miranda In The New Millennium, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 637 (2001), Mandy Defilippo
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Correction Of Wrongful Convictions: A Comparative Perspective, Lissa Griffin
The Correction Of Wrongful Convictions: A Comparative Perspective, Lissa Griffin
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Article analyzes the different modes in which two facially similar adversarial systems remedy wrongful convictions. Part I briefly examines the origins of wrongful convictions in both England and the United States. Part II describes the appellate processes in the two countries for correcting wrongful convictions. Part III addresses the processes for correcting wrongful convictions after the appellate processes have been completed. Part IV critiques the English process and examines whether aspects of that process may be carried over to the United States.
When Can A State Be Sued?, William W. Van Alstyne
When Can A State Be Sued?, William W. Van Alstyne
Faculty Scholarship
In her Popular Government article "When You Can't Sue the State: State Sovereign Immunity" (Summer 2000), Anita R. Brown-Graham described a series of recent decisions in which a sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court barred individuals from suing states for money damages for certain violations of federal law, such as laws prohibiting discrimination against employees because of their age. In the response that follows, William Van Alstyne argues that this barrier to relief is neither unduly imposing nor novel. The debate over the significance of these decisions is likely to continue. In February 2001, in another case decided by a five-to-four …
Procedural Rules Or Procedural Pretexts?: A Case Study Of Procedural Hurdles In Constitutional Challenges To The Texas Sodomy Law, Christopher R. Leslie
Procedural Rules Or Procedural Pretexts?: A Case Study Of Procedural Hurdles In Constitutional Challenges To The Texas Sodomy Law, Christopher R. Leslie
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Punishing Thought: A Narrative Deconstructing The Interpretive Dance Of Hate Crime Legislation, 35 J. Marshall L. Rev. 123 (2001), Anne B. Ryan
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Women Do Not Report The Violence They Suffer: Violence Against Women And The State Action Doctrine, Michelle J. Anderson
Women Do Not Report The Violence They Suffer: Violence Against Women And The State Action Doctrine, Michelle J. Anderson
Villanova Law Review (1956 - )
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Law—Commerce Clause—Violence Against Women Act's Civil Rights Remedy Exceeds Congress's Powers To Regulate Interstate Commerce. United States V. Morrison, 120 S. Ct. 1740 (2000)., Jennifer L. Wethington
Constitutional Law—Commerce Clause—Violence Against Women Act's Civil Rights Remedy Exceeds Congress's Powers To Regulate Interstate Commerce. United States V. Morrison, 120 S. Ct. 1740 (2000)., Jennifer L. Wethington
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Three Nixon Cases And Their Parallels In Malaysia, Myint Zan
The Three Nixon Cases And Their Parallels In Malaysia, Myint Zan
St. Thomas Law Review
During the period from 1974 to 1982 the Supreme Court of the United States decided three cases in which the late Richard M. Nixon, the 37th President of the United States of America was involved as an appellant/ petitioner. All three cases decided by the United States Supreme Court bore the name of Richard Nixon in the title of the cases. This Article will attempt to discern some of the legal and constitutional issues which have arisen from these "Three Nixon" cases. Some of the issues in these cases would inevitably have arisen out of issues that are peculiar to …
The Craft Of Due Process, Kevin C. Mcmunigal
The Craft Of Due Process, Kevin C. Mcmunigal
Faculty Publications
Response to Professor Israel's presentation "On the Costs of Uniformity and the Prospects of Dualism in Constitutional Criminal Procedure."
Reconceptualizing Federal Habeas Corpus For State Prisoners: How Should Aedpa's Standard Of Review Operate After Williams V. Taylor?, Adam N. Steinman
Reconceptualizing Federal Habeas Corpus For State Prisoners: How Should Aedpa's Standard Of Review Operate After Williams V. Taylor?, Adam N. Steinman
Faculty Scholarship
This Article aims to expand the debate over the proper standard of review that applies in state prisoner habeas corpus actions in federal court. To date, this debate has centered on whether federal habeas courts should defer to the state court's resolution of federal legal questions, or whether federal habeas courts should assess and apply federal law de novo. However, in Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000), the Supreme Court held that the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) imposes a deferential standard of review that precludes a federal habeas court from granting relief based simply on its …
Why The Eleventh Amendment Always Matters, Even When Transaction Costs Are Zero: A Reply To Professor Farber, Neil S. Siegel
Why The Eleventh Amendment Always Matters, Even When Transaction Costs Are Zero: A Reply To Professor Farber, Neil S. Siegel
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel
Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel
Articles
When I was first introduced to the constitutional regulation of criminal procedure in the mid-1950s, a single issue dominated the field: To what extent did the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment impose upon states the same constitutional restraints that the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments imposed upon the federal government? While those Bill of Rights provisions, as even then construed, imposed a broad range of constitutional restraints upon the federal criminal justice system, the federal system was (and still is) minuscule as compared to the combined systems of the fifty states. With the Bill of Rights provisions …
'Appropriate' Means-Ends Constraints On Section 5 Powers, Evan H. Caminker
'Appropriate' Means-Ends Constraints On Section 5 Powers, Evan H. Caminker
Articles
With the narrowing of Congress' Article I power to regulate interstate commerce and to authorize private suits against states, Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment provides Congress with an increasingly important alternative source of power to regulate and police state conduct. However, in City of Boerne v. Flores and subsequent cases, the Supreme Court has tightened the doctrinal test for prophylactic legislation based on Section Five. The Court has clarified Section Five's legitimate ends by holding that Congress may enforce Fourteenth Amendment rights only as they are defined by the federal judiciary, and the Court has constrained Section Five's permissible …
From Miranda To §3501 To Dickerson To...(Symposium: Miranda After Dickerson: The Future Of Confession Law), Yale Kamisar
From Miranda To §3501 To Dickerson To...(Symposium: Miranda After Dickerson: The Future Of Confession Law), Yale Kamisar
Articles
Once the Court granted [certiorari in Dickerson] court-watchers knew the hour had come. At long last the Court would have to either repudiate Miranda, repudiate the prophylactic-rule cases [the cases viewing Miranda's requirements as not rights protected by the Constitution, but merely "prophylactic rules"] or offer some ingenious reconciliation of the two lines of precedent. The Supreme Court of the United States, however, doesn't "have to" do anything, as the decision in Dickerson once again reminds us.
Examining The Lautenberg Amendment In The Civilian And Military Contexts: Congressional Overreaching, Statutory Vagueness, Ex Post Facto Violations, And Implementation Flaws, Jessica A. Golden
Fordham Urban Law Journal
The Lautenberg Amendment to the Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed in 1996 with the purpose of preventing gun-related domestic violence. The Lautenberg Amendment's passage raises unique commerce clause issues, and the amendment is possibly unconstitutional. Part I of the article examines the Commerce Clause (and Tenth Amendment) challenges to the Lautenberg Amendment. It provides the history of cases thus far failing to successfully challenge the constitutionality of the Lautenberg Amendment. It then discusses the Supreme Court's decision in Morrison v. Olson, that struck down the civil remedies provision of the Violence Against Women Act as a violation of …
Back To The Future Due Process Analysis, John E. Nowak
Back To The Future Due Process Analysis, John E. Nowak
Faculty Publications & Other Works
No abstract provided.
An Exception Swallows A Rule: Police Authority To Search Incident To Arrest, Wayne A. Logan
An Exception Swallows A Rule: Police Authority To Search Incident To Arrest, Wayne A. Logan
Scholarly Publications
Compared to Fourth Amendment jurisprudence more generally, with its well-earned reputation for complexity and variability, the search incident to arrest exception to the Amendment's warrant requirement would appear an oasis of consistency. The exception affords police an unqualified right to search anyone they arrest, without first obtaining a search warrant from a neutral judicial official. This right extends to the bodies of all arrestees, their area of "immediate control," and, if driving a car, the interior of the car and any containers located therein
Racial Profiling And Whren: Searching For Objective Evidence Of The Fourth Amendment On The Nation's Roads, Alberto B. Lopez
Racial Profiling And Whren: Searching For Objective Evidence Of The Fourth Amendment On The Nation's Roads, Alberto B. Lopez
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Impeachment Defanged And Other Institutional Ramifications Of The Clinton Scandals, Michael J. Gerhardt
Impeachment Defanged And Other Institutional Ramifications Of The Clinton Scandals, Michael J. Gerhardt
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Latin American Legal History: Some Essential Spanish Terms, M C. Mirow
Latin American Legal History: Some Essential Spanish Terms, M C. Mirow
Faculty Publications
Terms related to Latin American legal history translated into English.
Free Exercise Rights Of Capital Jurors, Brian Galle
Free Exercise Rights Of Capital Jurors, Brian Galle
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The Supreme Court has said that the Constitution permits trial judges to exclude from the pool of potential capital trial jurors any persons whose views on the death penalty would likely substantially impair their ability to reach an impartial verdict. This Note argues that the Court's analysis to date is incomplete, in that it omits close evaluation of potential conflicts between such exclusions and the Free Exercise Clause. The Note argues further that a court should apply strict scrutiny to any state action, such as exclusion for cause, that burdens the use of religious beliefs in the mental processes of …