Digital Commons Network^™

Why The Reagan Administration Resists Radical Transformation Of The Constitution, Gary C. Leedes

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Police Encouragement And The Fourth Amendment, 20 J. Marshall L. Rev. 661 (1987), Barry D. Green

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Interception Of Communications In Exigent Circumstances: The Fourth Amendment, Federal Legislation, And The United States Department Of Justice, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

Part I briefly reviews basic Fourth Amendment case law regulating searches and seizures, summarizes the exigent circumstances doctrine, and discusses the applicability of that doctrine to electronic surveillance of communications. Part II outlines Title III's requirements for a "standard" (non-emergency, non-roving) interception order, including what the application and order must contain, and how such an order must be executed. Part III studies the emergency surveillance provision of Title III and reviews Justice Department policies and practices in implementing that provision. Part IV analyzes the new roving intercept provision, discusses its constitutionality, and looks at some practical problems that may arise …

Casenotes: Constitutional Criminal Procedure — Self-Incrimination — Court May Compel Witnesses To Testify Before A Grand Jury Who Are Immune From Prosecution In The United States, But Amenable To Prosecution In A Foreign Jurisdiction. United States V. Under Seal, 794 F.2d 920 (4th Cir.), Cert. Denied, 107 S. Ct. 331 (1986), Ellen Beth Berkow

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Face--To Television Screen--To Face": Testimony By Closed-Circuit Television In Cases Of Alleged Child Abuse And The Confrontation Right, John Patrick Grant

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Stanley + Ferber = The Constitutional Crime Of At-Home Child Pornography Possession, Josephine R. Potuto

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

U.S. Supreme Court: The 1986-87 Term (Part Ii), Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

U.S. Supreme Court: The 1986-87 Term (Part I), Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

California's Prayer Healing Dilemma, Joanna A. Gekas

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

The Safe Schools Provision: Can A Nebulous Constitutional Right Be A Vehicle For Change, Stuart Biegel

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Decertification Of Police: An Alternative To Traditional Remedies For Police Misconduct, Roger Goldman, Steven Puro

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Crain V. Bordenkircher: Prison Reform In The Eighties--An Impossible Dream, Deborah Jean Saladini

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Death And The Supreme Court, Arthur J. Goldberg

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Preventive Detention: Liberty In The Balance, Kevin F. Arthur

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Extending The Self-Incrimination Clause To Persons In Fear Of Foreign Prosecution, Bret A. Fausett

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Note will examine the rationale, policies, and history behind the self-incrimination clause and will demonstrate the privilege's importance as an individual right and as a check on police power. Only by exploring the purposes and policies behind the privilege--an approach condoned by the Supreme Court--is one able to formulate the best answer to whether the self-incrimination clause extends to persons in fear of foreign prosecution. An understanding of what the privilege is supposed to protect will lead to a better understanding of the scope of this important constitutional guarantee. This Note will then focus on recent cases in which …

Re Enumerated Constitutional Rights The Only Rights We Have? The Case Of Associational Freedom, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Much of contemporary constitutional thought assumes that the only rights individuals have are either those that they are given by the legislature or those that are explicitly specified in the Constitution of the United States (or in a state constitution). Such a view of rights is based on the jurisprudential philosophy known as legal positivism, a view that has dominated academic discussions about legal rights for at least fifty years and that has begun to wane only in the last fifteen years.' In this Paper, I will try to explain how adherence to this legal positivism taints and distorts constitutional …

Media Access To Tape-Recorded Evidence In Criminal Trials, Lisa Kahaty Starczewski

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Establishing A Deprivation Of A Constitutional Right To Personal Security Under Section 1983: The Use Of Unjustified Force By State Officials In Violation Of The Fourth, Eighth, And Fourteenth Amendments, Kathryn R. Urbonya

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Preventative Pretrial Detention And The Failure Of Interest-Balancing Approaches To Due Process, Albert W. Alschuler

Michigan Law Review

This article, echoing Highmore's treatise of 1783, maintains that neither a legitimate nor a very important governmental interest can justify preventive detention in the absence of significant proof of past wrongdoing or an inability to control one's behavior. Both the Supreme Court's neglect of this issue and Congress' similar neglect in the preventive detention provisions of the Federal Bail Reform Act of 1984 reveal the extent to which cost-benefit analysis has captured American law and threatened core concepts of individual dignity.

The article does not oppose all forms of preventive pretrial detention. To the contrary, it recognizes that the detention …

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

Constitutional Law

No abstract provided.

United States V. Salerno, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Griffin V. Wisconsin, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

The Exclusionary Rule: Not The "Expressed Juice Of The Woolly-Headed Thistle", Keith A. Fabi

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Decency Of Capital Punishment For Minors: Contemporary Standards And The Dignity Of Juveniles, Lawrence A. Vanore

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Federal Courts, Federal Crimes And Federalism, Roger J. Miner '56

Federalism

No abstract provided.

Constraints Of Power: The Constitutional Opinions Of Judges Scalia, Bork, Posner, Easterbrook And Winter, James G. Wilson

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Barzilai V. Government Of Israel, Meir Shamgar, Aharon Barak

Translated Opinions

The petitions to the court related to the decision of the President of the State to pardon the Head of the General Security Service (G.S.S.) and three of his assistants in respect of all the offences attributed to them connected with the incident known as "bus no. 300". The pardons were granted by the President under sec. 11 (b) of the Basic Law: The President of the State, by which he is empowered "to pardon offenders and to lighten penalties by the reduction or commutation thereof." The principal issue raised in the petitions was whether the President had the power …

Criminal Law, Richard A. Williamson

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Expert Services And The Indigent Criminal Defendant: The Constitutional Madate Of Ake V. Oklahoma, John M. West

Michigan Law Review

This Note attempts to define the boundaries of the indigent criminal defendant's constitutional right to expert assistance, in the light of Ake v. Oklahoma. Part I briefly reviews the Ake decision and examines its constitutional background. Part II inquires into Ake's implications for experts other than psychiatrists and in contexts other than the insanity defense, arguing that the principles that guided the Ake decision have validity well beyond the facts of that case. Part III asks whether the Ake doctrine should be limited to capital cases. Rejecting such a limitation, it concludes that the right to expert assistance …

Section 3142(E) Of The 1984 Bail Reform Act: Rebuttable Presumption Or Mandatory Detention?, Evan Shapiro

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.