Digital Commons Network^™

The Habeas Corpus Certificate Of Probable Cause, Ira P. Robbins

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Recent Trends In American Criminal Sentencing Theory, Andrew Von Hirsch

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Sentencing In England , D. A. Thomas

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Warren Court (Was It Really So Defense-Minded?), The Burger Court (Is It Really So Prosecution-Oriented?), And Police Investigatory Practices, Yale Kamisar

Book Chapters

In one sense the Warren Court's "revolution" in American criminal procedure may be said to. have been launched by the 1956 case of Griffin v. Illinois (establishing an indigent criminal defendant's right to a free transcript on appeal, at least under certain circumstances) and to have been significantly advanced by two 1963 cases: Gideon v. Wainwright (entitling an indigent defendant to free counsel, at least in serious criminal cases) and Douglas v. California (requiring a state to provide an indigent with counsel on his first appeal from a criminal conviction). But these were not the cases that plunged the Warren …

Criminal Procedure, The Burger Court, And The Legacy Of The Warren Court, Jerold H. Israel

Book Chapters

Richard Nixon's criticism of the Warren Court during the 1968 presidential campaign centered largely on the Court's handling of cases involving criminal rights. According to candidate Nixon, the Court had gone much too far. It had twisted the Constitution to serve its own purposes, created a maze of legal technicalities that worked only to frustrate legitimate law enforcement efforts, and so weakened "the peace forces as against the criminal forces in this country" as to be largely responsible for the sharp rise in crime that had occurred in the sixties. What had to be done, continued Nixon, was to appoint …

Kentucky Law Survey: Criminal Procedure, William H. Fortune

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This Survey covers significant criminal procedure decisions of the Kentucky appellate courts for the period July 1, 1980, to July 1, 1982. It does not include cases construing the penal code or noteworthy decisions in the Kentucky law of evidence. The author has selected the most important criminal procedure cases for treatment in the text; a number of significant cases are summarized in footnotes.

The Legal/Extra-Legal Controversy: Judicial Decisions In Pretrial Release, Ilene H. Nagel

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This study analyzes data for state criminal defendants prosecuted in New York to determine the bases upon which judges make pretrial release decisions for these defendants. Treating statutory law as defining the category of legal variables, it finds legal factors substantially affect decisions about whether to release a defendant on recognizance, the amount of bail required, and whether to offer a defendant a cash alternative to a surety bond. The impact of these factors varies, however, depending upon the particular decision being made. Factors not prescribed in the statute-extra-legal factors—are also found to affect these pretrial release decisions. Their impact, …

Does (Did) (Should) The Exclusionary Rule Rest On A 'Principled Basis' Rather Than An 'Empirical Proposition'?, Yale Kamisar

Articles

[U]ntil the [exclusionary rule] rests on a principled basis rather than an empirical proposition, [the rule] will remain in a state of unstable equilibrium. Mapp v. Ohio, which overruled the then twelve-year-old Wolf case and imposed the fourth amendment exclusionary rule (the Weeks doctrine) on the states as a matter of fourteenth amendment due process, seemed to mark the end of an era. Concurring in Mapp, Justice Douglas recalled that Wolf had evoked "a storm of constitutional controversy which only today finds its end."' But in the two decades since Justice Douglas made this observation, the storm of controversy has …

Government Intrusion Into The Attorney-Client Relationship: An Interest Analysis Of Rights And Remedies, Philip Halpern

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Limitations On Prosecutorial Discovery, Eric Blumenson

Suffolk University Law School Faculty Works

The purpose of this Article is to explore the constitutional implications of prosecutorial discovery and to define the limits that the Constitution imposes upon it. Following an examination of the impact of prosecutorial discovery on the accusatorial system of justice, this Article identifies and describes four constitutionally grounded principles which call into question whether prosecutorial discovery may permissibly be expanded beyond the scope of the rule upheld by the Supreme Court in Williams v. Florida. First, the fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Williams, limits prosecutorial discovery to evidence that the defendant presently intends …

Questions Surrounding Virginia's Death Penalty, James T. Lloyd Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

On August 10, 1982, Frank J. Coppola died in Virginia's electric chair. His was the fifth execution since the 1976 Supreme Court decision holding that a punishment of death was not unconstitutional per se. In the Commonwealth of Virginia, Coppola's was the first execution in over a decade.

Virginia Criminal Procedure, Murray J. Janus

University of Richmond Law Review

Professor Ronald J. Bacigal of the T.C. Williams School of Law has made a valuable contribution to the criminal justice system with the recent publication of this book. Not only is the book well-written, but it is succinct and of a size that will easily fit into a lawyer's briefcase to accompany him to court. The manner in which the book is written is such that it can be readily understood by laymen interested in the law or used as the text for a course on criminal procedure in law school or college, and yet the book is detailed enough …

The Availability Of A First Appearance And Preliminary Hearing - Now You See Them, Now You Don't, Linda A. Malone

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Sentencing In West Germany , Thomas Weigend

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Nonadversarial Justice: The French Experience, Edward A. Tomlinson

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure - Probation - Exclusionary Rule Is Inapplicable To Probation Revocation Proceedings, Requiring District Courts To Grant Postponement Or Use Immunity For Revocation Proceedings Commenced Prior To State Court Trial Of The Underlying Criminal Charges Is An Inappropriate Exercise Of The Third Circuit's Supervisory Power, Jan S. Lipschultz

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Criminal Procedure, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Numerous changes in the rules governing criminal trials in federal court have been in effect for four months. Some are major and some are minor, but they should be studied carefully by lawyers handling criminal cases. Amendments have been made to:

Punishment, Kent Greenawalt

Faculty Scholarship

Although punishment has been a crucial feature of every legal system, widespread disagreement exists over the moral principles that can justify its imposition. One fundamental question is why (and whether) the social institution of punishment is warranted. A second question concerns the necessary conditions for punishment in particular cases. A third relates to the degree of severity that is appropriate for particular offenses and offenders. Debates about punishment are important in their own right, but they also raise more general problems about the proper standards for evaluating social practices.

The main part of this theoretical overview of the subject of …

Abolition Of The Insanity Defense: Madness And The Criminal Law, Richard G. Singer

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Excessive Sanctions For Governmental Misconduct In Criminal Cases, Richard A. Posner

Washington Law Review

The fourth amendment, as is well known, forbids unreasonable searches and seizures by government officers; if the government tries to introduce evidence in a criminal trial that was seized in violation of the fourth amendment, the defendant can get the evidence suppressed. If the evidence is vital to conviction, this means that the defendant will be acquitted simply because the evidence was obtained illegally. This is the famous exclusionary rule of the law of search and seizure. The exclusionary rule is one example of a sanction for governmental miconduct: evidence that may be essential to convicting a dangerous criminal is …

The Exclusionary Rule, Deterrence And Posner's Economic Analysis Of Law, Arval A. Morris

Washington Law Review

Judge Posner holds economic theory demonstrates that the fourth amendment's exclusionary rule and other judicially developed doctrines implementing the Constitution impose excessive sanctions for governmental misconduct in criminal cases. This Article, focusing on the exclusionary rule, aims to place his economic argument in historical context and to assess it.

Prosecutorial Peremptory Challenge Practices In Capital Cases: An Empirical Study And A Constitutional Analysis, Bruce J. Winick

Michigan Law Review

As presently construed, the Constitution does not prohibit the death penalty. The states and the federal government may punish the commission of certain crimes with death, so long as the extreme penalty is not imposed on a mandatory basis and so long as the procedures used in imposing a death sentence meet constitutional scrutiny.

A demonstration that the prosecutor used the peremptory challenge in the manner described in a single case probably would be insufficient to support a constitutional challenge in the federal courts and in the vast majority of state courts. In these courts a prosecutor's use of the …

Prosecutorial Vindictiveness In The Criminal Appellate Process: Due Process Protection After United States V. Goodwin, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note reformulates the doctrine of prosecutorial vindictiveness in light of the distinction drawn in Goodwin between pretrial and posttrial charging decisions. Part I recounts the development of the vindictiveness concept, and argues that in extending the doctrine beyond the factual settings which moved the Supreme Court to fashion its original prophylactic rule, the circuit courts have seriously eroded an essential due process safeguard. Part II critically examines the distinction between pretrial and posttrial charging decisions relied upon in Goodwin. Developing the logical corollary of the Goodwin holding, this Part argues that just as the pretrial situation does not …

Jones V. Barnes, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Solem V. Helm, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Judicial Control Of Prosecutorial Discretion In Pretrial Diversion Programs, William Helmer

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Agency Access To Grand Jury Transcripts Under Rule 6 (E), Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Part I examines the courts' current certainty-based perspective, and rejects this approach because it sacrifices important interests in civil law enforcement and judicial consistency for speculative and coincidental reductions in grand jury abuse. Part II defends the proposed standard by arguing that it comports with the language and intent of the rule while more effectively advancing the policy interests in civil law enforcement and grand jury secrecy.

Recidivist Statutes—Application Of Proportionality And Overbreadth Doctrines To Repeat Offenders—Wanstreet V. Bordenkircher, 276 S.E.2d 205 (W. Va. 1981), Marc G. Wilhelm

Washington Law Review

In 1967 George Wanstreet was convicted of forging a forty-three dollar check and received a life sentence under West Virginia's recidivist statute. This statute, one of the two harshest in the nation, requires life imprisonment for persons convicted of three felonies. Wanstreet had been convicted in 1951 for forging an eighteen dollar check and in 1955 for arson of a barn valued at $490. He had been in prison more than ten years for the 1967 conviction when the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals held, in Wanstreet v. Bordenkircher, that his sentence violated the proportionality clause of the West …

Pretrial Procedure Under The Massachusetts Rules Of Criminal Procedure, Eric D. Blumenson, Eva Nilsen

Faculty Scholarship

The Massachusetts Rules of Criminal Procedure became effective on July 1, 1979. While many of their provisions helpfully codify previously existing practice and case law, the Rules have in some areas effected a major transformation of criminal procedure. This article examines the changes wrought by the Rules in the pretrial arena, with emphasis on those areas that remain somewhat unfamiliar to the practitioner or untested against constitutional challenge in the courts. While the Rules appear to have done an admirable job of simplifying and rationalizing the criminal trial process, their emphasis on mutuality and reciprocity have in some cases created …

Stone V. Powell And The Effective Assistance Of Counsel, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Part I briefly identifies the considerations underlying the Stone Court's decision to limit habeas corpus review of fourth amendment claims. Part II then argues against applying Stone to the sixth amendment claim. After establishing the analytic difference between the two constitutional claims and examining Stone's "opportunity for full and fair litigation" standard, it concludes that Stone is fully consistent with free review of habeas corpus petitions alleging incompetent handling of fourth amendment questions. Finally, responding to a popular interpretation of Stone, Part II demonstrates that the possibility that ineffectiveness claims may not further the determination of a defendant's …