Digital Commons Network^™

Involuntary Confessions And Article 35, Criminal Procedure Code, Stanley Z. Fisher

Faculty Scholarship

Improper methods of police interrogation are known to every country in the world. And everywhere, it is agreed that an accused's confession of guilt which has been procured through physical violence, psychological intimidation, or improper inducements or promises cannot be considered in evidence against him at trial. The primary reason why involuntary confessions are excluded from evidence is that they are unreliable indices of truth; men have been known to admit crimes of which they are innocent, simply to escape the pain of torture or to obtain an irresistible benefit.

The Winds Of Change: Criminal Procedure In New York 1941-1965, Monrad G. Paulsen

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure—Right To Assigned Counsel Now Available To Misdemeanants Tried In Special Sessions Courts, David A. Grzywna

Buffalo Law Review

People v. Witenski, 15 N.Y.2d 392, 207 N.E.2d 358, 259 N.Y.S.2d 413 (1965).

Limiting Instructions In Joint Criminal Trials

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Psychiatrist As An Expert Witness: Some Ruminations And Speculations, Bernard L. Diamond, David W. Louisell

Michigan Law Review

Consider the difference between the expert testimony of an orthopedic surgeon in a personal injury suit and the testimony of a psychiatrist in a murder trial in which some elements of the mens rea are at issue. In both instances an expert opinion is received in evidence, providing the trier of fact with technical, specialized information which must, or should, be available in order to permit a rational decision-making process. Well-established rules govern the nature of expert evidence and its mode of presentation. In legal theory, the orthopedic surgeon and the psychiatrist are both experts-physicians-who perform comparable functions in the …

The Defense Of Indigent Persons Accused Of Crime In Washington—A Survey, Richard B. Amandes, George Neff Stevens

Washington Law Review

Eight months before the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Gideon v. Wainwright the American Bar Association, in accordance with its long existing concern with the problem of indigent defendants, authorized the appointment of a special committee with associate subcommittees in each state "to study present practices and to initiate, coordinate and accelerate efforts to assure adequacy of the defense provided indigent persons accused of crime in the United States..." The work of state subcommittees was coordinated and directed by the American Bar Foundation. This article is based upon the report prepared by the Washington subcommittee, and follows …

The Right To Counsel And The Indigent Accused In Courts Of Criminal Jurisdiction In New York State, Paul Ivan Birzon, Robert Kasanof, Joseph Forma

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Why Imprisonment Must Go, Giles Playfair

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Kamisar, Inbau & Arnold: Criminal Justice In Our Time, Theodore Souris

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Criminal Justice in Our Time by Yale Kamisar, Fred E. Inbau, and Thurman Arnold

The Right To Counsel During Police Interrogation - Escobedo V. Illinois

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Discovery In Criminal Cases - A Survey Of The Proposed Rule Changes, Joseph Fontana

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Gideon's Army: Student Soldiers, Henry Paul Monaghan

Faculty Scholarship

Ours is a nation that takes great pride in the manner in which it administers justice to its citizens. To us, "equal justice under law" is not simply hollow rhetoric; it gives expression to some of our most fundamental values, and it proclaims that every man should be treated fairly and equally in the administration of the laws. It is, of course, of no small moment that we hold such an ideal, for a nation invites judgment on how well its performance comports with its professions of faith.

In the administration of our laws there is much to which we …

Book Review, Ira Michael Heyman, Michael E. Tigar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Role Of A Trial Jury In Determining The Voluntariness Of A Confession, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States has vigorously implemented the principle that criminal prosecution is an investigative, not an inquisitorial, process. Evidence of guilt must be obtained by methods free from physical or psychological coercion. Protections in the Bill of Rights against illegal search and seizure, self-incrimination, and trial without counsel have been extended to the states through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. Safeguards against the admissibility of coerced confessions into evidence have also been instituted. Because a confession practically determines the ultimate question of guilt, the critical standards for· admissibility are frequently challenged on appeal. …

Effectice Representation—An Evasive Substantive Notion Masquerading As Procedure, Kenneth O. Jarvi

Washington Law Review

Recent cases show an increasing judicial concern with the right to counsel for an indigent accused. This concern flows from the constitutional requirement of a fair trial for every accused, and has culminated with Gideon v. Wainright, establishing the right to counsel in the state courts in all cases. Concommitantly, a related concept of effective representation has acquired momentum. It dates from the language of Powell v. Alabama. This latter concept encompasses answers to the question of what amounts to competent and/or effective counsel. The answers to the question have proved to be delicate and shifting in emphasis from concern …

Executive And Judicial Banishment Compared

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Derivative Evidence Under Mcnabb-Mallory

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law And Procedure -- 1963 Tennessee Survey, Robert E. Kendrick

Vanderbilt Law Review

1. Homicide. A number of years ago the Tennessee Supreme Court adopted the common law principle that one is justified in taking life in defense of his habitation when actually or apparently necessary to repel an attempt by another to enter forcibly or violently under circumstances creating a reasonable apprehension that the assailant's design is imminently to commit a felony therein or to assault or offer personal violence or inflict personal injury on an inmate so that there are reasonable grounds for concluding that life is endangered or great bodily harm is threatened thereby.'

Flippen v. State, a homicide case, …

Constitutional Law-Federal Criminal Procedure-Right To Counsel Under Section 2255 Of The Judicial Code, Gerald J. Laba

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner, seeking to attack a conviction for illegal possession of narcotics, was granted leave to sue in form a pauperis under 28 U.S.C. section 2255, but his request that counsel be appointed for him was denied. Petitioner's section 2255 motion to vacate judgment was denied. Petitioner then entered a second section 2255 petition alleging basically the same errors but adding that the court had erred in not appointing counsel for his first petition. The second motion was denied without a hearing on the ground that it was "the second or successive motion for similar relief .... " Petitioner appealed in …

Criminal Justice, Robert F. Kennedy

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Next In Federal Criminal Rules?, Walter E. Hoffman

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law--Insanity And Criminal Responsibility--The Status Of The M'Naughten Plus Irresistible Impulse Test, John Dixon Jr.

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Other Answers: Search And Seizure, Coerced Confession And Criminal Trial In Scotland, Paul Hardin Iii

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Rule Of Announcement And Unlawful Entry: Miller V. United States And Ker V. California, G. Robert Blakey

Journal Articles

Mr. Justice Frankfurter, in his classic dissent in United States v. Rabinowitz, pointed out that "the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people." Few cases decided by the Supreme Court since Rabinowitz have better illustrated that observation than Miller v. United States and Ker v. California. This Article will consider the problems posed in the administration of federal criminal justice by the "liberty forged" in these two decisions.

Until the Miller decision in 1958, the Supreme Court had never squarely considered and decided a question of announcement and unlawful entry. It is therefore …

In Search Of Criminology. By Leon Radzinowicz, William B. Enright

San Diego Law Review

At the 1963 California State Bar Convention, Chief Justice Phil S. Gibson, in the course of an address to the profession, stated: "History will judge the quality of a civilization by the manner in which it enforces its criminal laws." This remark by the Chief Justice indicates the larger problem to which the author of the new book In Search of Criminology has addressed himself.

Poverty And Criminal Justice, Arval A. Morris

Washington Law Review

A conflict of the ideal of equality with reality exists today. Although our society has been characterized as affluent, there exist many citizens for whom reasonable legal fees appear unreasonable or impossible.

The Indigent Defendant In The State Criminal Proceeding: Betts V. Brady Is Interred

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Right To Counsel Prior To Trial In State Criminal Proceedings, Michael J. Osman

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Habeas Corpus - Federal Courts Have Power To Issue The Writ Provided Petitioner Has Exhausted Remedies Available In State Court At Time Of Application, Thomas M. Twardowski

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Gideon V. Wainwright: The Art Of Overruling, Jerold H. Israel

Articles

During the 1962 Term, the Supreme Court, on a single Monday, announced six decisions concerned with constitutional limitations upon state criminal procedure. The most publicized of these, though probably not the most important in terms of legal theory or practical effect, was Gideon v. Wainwright. In an era of constantly expanding federal restrictions on state criminal processes, the holding of Gideon-that an indigent defendant in a state criminal prosecution has an unqualified right to the appointment of counsel-was hardly startling. And while Gideon will obviously have an important effect in the handful of states that still fail to appoint counsel …