Digital Commons Network^™

The Faretta Principle: Self Representation Versus The Right To Counsel, Paul Marcus

Faculty Publications

The United States Constitution makes provision for criminal defendants to be represented by counsel. In the federal jurisdiction this principle was vigorously applied, even to indigent persons, very early in the Twentieth Century. The United States Supreme Court, however, was reluctant to impose this requirement on the states except in cases of unusual circumstances where the absence of counsel would have affected the basic fairness of the trial. Finally, in a landmark decision by the Supreme Court, it was held that the right to counsel applies in both federal and state cases. For the past twenty years, federal and state …

Globe Newspaper Co. V. Superior Court For The County Of Norfolk, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

"Deprogramming": From The Defense Counsel's Perspective, Albert R. Vermeire

West Virginia Law Review

We begin with the proposition that the right of freedom of thought protected by the First Amendment against State action includes both the right to speak freely and the right to refrain from speaking at all. A system which secures the right to proselytize religious, political and ideological causes must also guarantee the concomitant right to decline to foster such concepts. The right to speak and the right to refrain from speaking are complementary components of the broader concept of 'individual freedom of mind.' Anguished parents and sympathetic judges; concerned attorneys and psychologists; reality-inducing therapists, police officers and adult or …

Silence As A Moral And Constitutional Right, R. Kent Greenawalt

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Griffin V. California: Still Viable After All These Years, Craig M. Bradley

Michigan Law Review

In a recent article in the Michigan Law Review, Donald Ayer levels a series of attacks on the Griffin decision. Specifically, he maintains that the decision is at once too broad, because it requires "almost automatic reversal where there are any remarks explicitly focused on the defendant's silence and the inference of guilt to be drawn from it" regardless of the strength of the prosecution's case, and too narrow, because it fails to prevent the natural prejudice against the nontestifying defendant that may arise in the minds of the jurors without any encouragement from prosecutor or judge. Ayer also …

From Estes To Chandler: Shifting The Constitutional Burden Of Courtroom Cameras To The States, Margot Pequignot

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reflections On Alfred Hill's "Testimonial Privilege And Fair Trial", Peter Westen

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

I have learned a great deal from "Testimonial Privilege and Fair Trial"-as I always do from Professor Hill's work. Indeed, he has changed my way of thinking in this area in several important respects. At the same time, I come to rather different conclusions than he regarding each of his three major topics. Part I of this article examines the problem of finding a "remedy" for testimonial privileges that violate a defendant's right to a fair trial. Part II discusses the problem of determining when a defendant is entitled to assert that the "right" has been violated. Finally, Part III …

Beyond Custody: Expanding Collateral Review Of State Convictions, Timothy C. Hester

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This article advocates extension of collateral review to embrace all parties alleging deprivation of federally guaranteed rights in the state criminal process, regardless of whether the party fulfills the habeas corpus custody requirement. Part I assesses the sufficiency of Supreme Court certiorari jurisdiction to monitor adequately state adjudications of federal constitutional rights, coupled with an evaluation of the technical competency and institutional posture of state courts. Part II examines the significance of the custody limitation on collateral review, both as a substantive element of habeas corpus relief and as a mechanism for funnelling limited judicial resources. Part III presents two …

Summer V. Mata: Twilight's Last Gleaming For Federal Habeas Corpus Review Of State Court Convictions - Speculations On The Future Of The Great Writ, Jason G. Reynolds

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Military Justice System And The Right To Trial By Jury: Size And Voting Requirements Of The General Courts-Martial For Service Connected Civilian Offenses, Frank J. Chmelik

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Standing Up For Fourth Amendment Rights: Salvucci, Rawlings, And The Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy (Comment), Elizabeth Brandt

Articles

The initial inquiry a court must make before considering a motion to suppress evidence based on an unreasonable search and seizure is whether the individual has standing under the fourth amendment. This Note examines the historical development of the standing doctrines leading to the reasonable expectation of privacy test adopted by the Supreme Court in Rakas v. Illinois. The Note also identifies the problems created by the Court's far-reaching application of this test. The author concludes that the overall effect of recent decisions may be to limit the number of defendants able to assert fourth amendment claims, since suppression hearing …

The Role Of The Supreme Court In A Democratic Society, Raoul Berger

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Reliance On State Constitutions--Away From A Reactionary Approach, Ronald K. L. Collins

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Governmental Misconduct And The Right Of Liberty, Michael A. Vaccari

Fordham Urban Law Journal

The due process clauses of the fifth and fourth amendments to the United States Constitution protect individuals from arbitrary and capricious government action. This article explores the violation of a criminal defendant's right to liberty when a conviction is the result of unreasonable law enforcement misconduct. The article examines the limitations placed on the actions of government officials contained in the fourth and fifth amendments and the defense of entrapment. It also offers an analysis of the nature and scope of the due process right of liberty, through a philosophical lens. This article finally posits the legal basis for recognizing …

Defense Witness Immunity, Michael R. Boone

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law–Racketeer Influence And Corrupt Organization Act–Defining Enterprise, Judy Broach Proctor

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Shifting Burdens In Criminal Law: A Burden On Due Process, Vivian Deborah Wilson

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Plea Bargaining And The Supreme Court: The Limits Of Due Process And Substantive Justice, Kevin J. O'Brien

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

American Constitutional Law 1976–1981, Donald P. Kommers, Kenneth Ripple, John A. Scanlan

Journal Articles

From the Introduction:

"The principal goal of this report is to chart for an essentially non-American audience the course of doctrinal movement and change in important areas of Ameri­can constitutional law. The report relics almost entirely upon primary sources, particularly the decisions and opinions of the United States Supreme Court. The opinions and decisions discussed here arc those which in our view have had the most impact upon American governmental institutions, political processes, and constitu­tional policy in the period under review. In the short space provided we clearly cannot cover developments in all areas of American constitutional law. One such …

Perils Of The Rulemaking Process: The Development, Application, And Unconstitutionality Of Rule 804(B)(3)'S Penal Interest Exception, Peter W. Tague

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

As the culmination of a decade of rulemaking, in 1975 Congress enacted the Federal Rules of Evidence, which include in rule 804(b)(3) an exception to the hearsay rule that allows federal courts to admit statements against penal interest. Having reviewed previously unpublished memoranda and nonpublic tape recordings of the deliberations of the Advisory and Standing Committees to the Judicial Conference and the Special Subcommittee on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws of the House Judiciary Committee, Professor Tague explores the development of rule 804(b)(3), one of the more controversial rules that emerged from that rulemaking process. After analyzing rule 804(b)(3) and …

Griffin V. California: Still Viable After All These Years, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

"Twisting Slowly In The Wind": A Search For Constitutional Limits On Coercion Of The Criminal Defendant, John C. Coffee Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

In the corridor outside Courtroom Four, Foster Clark approached the prosecutor. "I was wondering," he said, "are we really going to have to try this case?"

"Well," the prosecutor said, "that depends. He's dead on and gone to heaven, if that's what you mean. He doesn't have a prayer."

"I was wondering if we could work something out," Clark said. "I haven't really had a chance to talk with him, but I was wondering."

"So talk to him," the prosecutor said. "Find out where he stands, and call me."

* * *

"Look," the prosecutor said, "you know I can't …

Constitutional Protection For Private Papers, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Wood V. Georgia, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Little V. Streater, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Rhodes V. Chapman, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

The Teaching Of Constitutional Law In American Law Schools, George D. Haimbaugh Jr.

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Drawing The Line On The Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel Defense: United States V. Decoster (Iii)

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Interstate Extradition: Should The Asylum State Governor Have Unbridled Discretion, Gregory K. Wanlass Gregory K. Wanlass

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

State V. Frazier, Lucinda Masterton

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.