Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Brown v. Board of Education (2)
- Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education (1)
- Bellamy v. Mason's Stores (1)
- Bradley v. School Board of the City of Richmond (1)
- Breed v. Jones (1)
-
- Burford v. Commonwealth (1)
- Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority (1)
- Carterv. West FelicianaParish School Board (1)
- Constitutional Convention (1)
- ERA (1)
- Equal Rights Amendment (1)
- Frame of Government (1)
- Fuentes v. Shevin (1)
- Fuller v. Oregon (1)
- Gagnon v. Scarpelli (1)
- Gilliam v. School Board of Hopewell (1)
- Green v. School Board of Roanoke (1)
- Griffin v. Breckenridge (1)
- In re Gault (1)
- In re Winship (1)
- Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co. (1)
- Jeffers v. Whitley (1)
- McKeiver v. Pennsylvania (1)
- Milliken v. Bradley (1)
- Miranda v. Arizona (1)
- Mitchell v. W.T. Grant Co. (1)
- Moose Lodge No. 107 v. Irvis (1)
- Morrissey v. Brewer (1)
- Murphy v. Commonwealth (1)
- Public Utility Commission v. Pollak (1)
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Constitutional Law- Due Process- All But Minimal Procedural Due Process Safeguards Held Inapplicable At In-Prison Disciplinary Proceedings
University of Richmond Law Review
Inmates in penal institutions have historically been afforded less than the full panoply of procedural rights which the federal courts have guaranteed in criminal proceedings. The traditional attitude that constitutional rights were left outside the prison gate eventually gave way to a recognition that some fundamental substantivedue process rights are retained by prisoners. Because of an unwillingness to risk possible impairment of security and order by overburdening officials with procedural matters, the judiciary fashioned a "hands-off" doctrine as to proceduraldue process rights. This doctrine precluded judicial review of prison disciplinary action absent a showing that the action violated the eighth …
Constitutional Law-Equal Protection-Reimbursement Of Appointed Counsel Fees As A Condition Of Probation Held Not Violative Of The Equal Protection Clause
University of Richmond Law Review
Every defendant facing criminal prosecution that may result in imprisonment is guaranteed the right to counsel. The Supreme Court has required appointed counsel for indigents in widening classes of cases and at different stages of prosecution. This trend has increased the burden on public revenues, and many states, in an effort to recover some of the costs, have enacted recoupment statutes. Several state courts have expressed unfavorable opinions as to the constitutionality of these statutes. The first Supreme Court decision to focus on a state recoupment statute struck it down as violative of the equal protection clause.
Constitutional Law-Termination Of Utility Services For Nonpayment Of Bill Without A Hearing Does Not Violate Due Process Clause Of Fourteenth Amendment
University of Richmond Law Review
Present governmental regulation of public utilities can be traced back to early English common law which imposed duties and obligations upon those who performed vital public services. Two theories justified the imposition of these controls. The first focused on the monopoly status of the regulated business, while the second relied on the "public calling" aspect of the enterprise. Today under the judicial power almost every state has a public utility commission which imposes a wide range of controls over the production and delivery of utility services. This can have far-reaching consequences because the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment …
Constitutional Law-Civil Rights-Absent State Involvement, Right Of Association Not Protected By 42 Usc § 1985(3)
University of Richmond Law Review
42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) was enacted' to curtail the Ku Klux Klan's terrorist activities in the South by prohibiting conspiracies to deprive any person "of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws. . . ." From its inception, the major controversy has concerned whether the statute requires an element of state action. The first judicial statement construed the statute as reaching only conspiracies carried out under color of state law. Twenty years later, a unanimous Supreme Court found the statute to "fully encompass the conduct of private persons" attempting to deprive an …
Constitutional Law-Criminal Law-Criminal Prosecution Subsequent To Juvenile Court Adjudicatory Hearing Constitutes Double Jeopardy
University of Richmond Law Review
In the late nineteenth century, the juvenile court system was established in this country to deal with youths who had committed criminal offenses, were likely to do so, or were otherwise in need of state supervision. Contrary to the criminal system, the juvenile courts began with articulated goals of treatment and rehabilitation. In theory, the state, acting through the juvenile system and under the doctrine of parens patriae, would shield the juvenile from the harsh reality of the criminal courts by placing him within a paternalistic judicial framework with a vast spectrum of remedies and a minimum of procedural formalities.
State Legislative Ratification Of Federal Constitutional Amendments: An Overview, Philip L. Martin
State Legislative Ratification Of Federal Constitutional Amendments: An Overview, Philip L. Martin
University of Richmond Law Review
Article V of the United States Constitution sets out the amend- ment procedure, which consists of two stages, proposal and ratification. Each stage, in turn, offers two alternative procedures which can be interchanged to provide four means of effecting constitutional alteration. An amendment may be proposed either by a two-thirds vote of each house of Congress or by a national convention assembled upon proper application by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states; and an amendment may be ratified, as Congress decides, either by three-fourths of the state legislatures or by conventions in three-fourths of the states. To date, the …
Constitutional Law-Double Jeopardy-Misdemeanor Conviction At Preliminary Hearing Held A Bar Ta Subsequent Felony Prosecution Upon Double Jeopardy Principlus
University of Richmond Law Review
The Virginia Constitution provides: "That in criminal prosecutions a man . . . shall not . . . be put twice in jeopardy for the same offense." This prohibition against double jeopardy is also embodied in the United States Constitution, as well as having been established at common law. However, what constitutes the same offense has proven to be a source of difficulty when applied to a particular case.
Constitutional Law-Due Process-Ex Parte Seizure Of Secured Property Under Judicial Supervision Held Not To Violate Due Process
University of Richmond Law Review
Summary creditor remedies have come under increasing attack in recent years. The major question has been whether prejudgment seizures of secured property comport with procedural due process. The United States Supreme Court, in Fuentes v. Shevin, had apparently settled the question by holding that procedural due process requires notice to the debtor and an opportunity to be heard before a state authorizes its agents to seize property from him on the application of another.
Constitutional Law-Equal Protection-Federal Court Cannot Order Multi-School District Remedy For Single District De Jure Segregation Absent An Interdistrict Violation
University of Richmond Law Review
The landmark decision of Brown v. Board of Education held that the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment prohibited a state from maintaining racially segregated public schools. After years of attempted but ineffective implementation of the mandate of Brown I, the Supreme Court attacked the issue with vigor in the late 1960's. State and local authorities-were placed under an affirmative duty to convert to a unitary school system which promised to work immediately towards the elimination of the discrimination inherent in state compelled dual school systems.
Constitutional Law-Equal Protection-Failure To Appoint Counsel On Discretionary Appeals Held Not Violative Of Fourteenth Amendment
University of Richmond Law Review
An indigent defendant in a state criminal prosecution is guaranteed the right to appointed counsel. The boundaries of this right, however, have yet to be fully developed. For instance, the right to counsel on appeal has developed in stages. Initially, the indigent criminal defendant successfully attacked state statutes establishing filing fees or other financial prerequisites which denied him access to the appellate level. Soon the Supreme Court clarified its position on such discriminatory statutes by specifically extending the right to proceed in forma pauperisto discretionary appeals. The indigent attempted to extend the Court's reasoning in the filing fee cases to …
School Desegregation In Richmoad: A Case History, Gary C. Leedes, James M. O'Fallon
School Desegregation In Richmoad: A Case History, Gary C. Leedes, James M. O'Fallon
University of Richmond Law Review
The story of judicially administered school desegregation in Richmond is the story of Bradley v. School Board of the City of Richmond. It began modestly with a district court decree which granted the individual claims of ten named plaintiffs but denied injunctive relief to the class. Eleven years later it approached landmark status, with a district court decree directing consolidation of the Richmond schools with those of surrounding Henrico and Chesterfield counties. However, the landmark was not to be. The Fourth Circuit reversed the district court's decree, and an evenly divided Supreme Court affirmed by default. Richmond was left in …