Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (4)
- Constitutional claims (2)
- Constitutional interpretation (2)
- Finality (2)
- Guilty pleas (2)
-
- Admissibility (1)
- Balancing tests (1)
- Confessions (1)
- Custodial interrogations (1)
- Due process (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Marshall (John) (1)
- Marshall Court (1)
- Massiah v. United States (1)
- Miranda v. Arizona (1)
- Parole (1)
- Parole revocation (1)
- Police (1)
- Right to counsel (1)
- Sixth Amendment (1)
- Voluntary nature (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Due Process And Parole Revocation, Michigan Law Review
Due Process And Parole Revocation, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
In Morrissey, the Court set the level of due process needed in parole revocations. Specifically, it held that the parolee facing •revocation has a right (a) to receive written notice of the claimed parole violations; (b) to hear the evidence against him; (c) to be heard in person and to present witnesses and documentary evidence; (d) to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses (unless the hearing officer specifically finds good cause for not allowing the confrontation); (e) to have a neutral and detached hearing body, members of which need not be judicial officers or lawyers; and (f) to be given …
Pleas Of Guilty And The Loss Of Constitutional Rights: The Current Price Of Pleading Guilty, Stephen A. Saltzburg
Pleas Of Guilty And The Loss Of Constitutional Rights: The Current Price Of Pleading Guilty, Stephen A. Saltzburg
Michigan Law Review
This Article proposes the same basic rule as Westen's to explain the Supreme Court's decisions, but for very different reasons which require several modifications of the Westen rule. I argue that all the guilty-plea cases, properly viewed, are consistent with, and therefore can be read as evidence of, a theory more easily applied than articulated by the Court: that some constitutional rights are largely premised on notions of litigation avoidance, that their "avoidance" rationales must be respected, and that these rights therefore prevent governments from establishing procedural rules that force criminal defendants to go to trial-to choose more rather than …
Forfeiture By Guilty Plea--A Reply, Peter Westen
Forfeiture By Guilty Plea--A Reply, Peter Westen
Michigan Law Review
I will begin by describing what I think Professor Saltzburg and I both mean by a ''legal theory." I then apply that standard to test the validity of the two theories at issue here, first Professor Saltzburg's, then mine. I next discuss a third theory that is independent of both Professor Saltzburg's and mine, viz., that whether a constitutional claim survives a guilty plea depends on whether it is ''jurisdictional." Finally, I comment generally on the concept of forfeiture and its influence on the way one conceives of constitutional rights.
The Eighteenth-Century Background Of John Marshall's Constitutional Jurisprudence, William E. Nelson
The Eighteenth-Century Background Of John Marshall's Constitutional Jurisprudence, William E. Nelson
Michigan Law Review
This analysis of Marshall's constitutional jurisprudence avoids the pitfalls of previous theories. It does not see the Federalist political program as the source of Marshall's constitutional doctrines and thus does not need to explain how Marshall qualified his political principles or how he convinced non-Federalist judges to accept them. Instead, this essay argues that legal, not political, principles underlay Marshall's jurisprudence, but it attempts to understand those principles in a manner consistent with the unavoidable twentieth-century assumption that law is a body of flexible rules responsive to social reality rather than a series of immutable, unambiguous doctrines derived from a …
Equal Protection: A Closer Look At Closer Scrutiny, Michigan Law Review
Equal Protection: A Closer Look At Closer Scrutiny, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note proposes to restore means-end analysis to legal respectability through a comprehensive integrated approach to purpose, misfit, and balancing. The search for a rational basis is meaningless if there are no constraints on the kind of purpose which may justify a classification. Therefore, this Note initially explores ways in which a court can more rigorously scrutinize statutory purpose. The next significant question is how a court should evaluate the degree of coincidence between the class picked out by the law and the class which would be picked out if the law were to achieve its goals. Such "misfit" analysis …
Brewer V. Williams, Massiah And Miranda: What Is 'Interrogation'? When Does It Matter?, Yale Kamisar
Brewer V. Williams, Massiah And Miranda: What Is 'Interrogation'? When Does It Matter?, Yale Kamisar
Articles
On Christmas Eve, 1968, a ten-year-old girl, Pamela Powers, disappeared while with her family in Des Moines, Iowa.2 Defendant Williams, an escapee from a mental institution and a deeply religious person, 3 was suspected of murdering her, and a warrant was issued for his arrest.4 Williams telephoned a Des Moines lawyer, McKnight, and on his advice surrendered himself to the Davenport, Iowa, police.5 Captain Learning and another Des Moines police officer arranged to drive the 160 miles to Davenport, pick up Williams, and return him directly to Des Moines. 6 Both the trial court 7 and the federal district court8 …