Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (14)
- Selected Works (3)
- SelectedWorks (3)
- Duke Law (2)
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (1)
-
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- Pace University (1)
- Pepperdine University (1)
- St. John's University School of Law (1)
- The University of Akron (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- University of Michigan Law School (1)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (1)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (1)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (13)
- Faculty Scholarship (3)
- Casey J Cooper (2)
- Jeffrey Bellin (2)
- Akron Law Review (1)
-
- Articles (1)
- Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Indiana Law Journal (1)
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (1)
- Michigan Law Review (1)
- NYLS Law Review (1)
- Pepperdine Law Review (1)
- Richard Daniel Klein (1)
- Scholarly Works (1)
- St. John's Law Review (1)
- Steve Sheppard (1)
- Villanova Law Review (1)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 34
Full-Text Articles in Law
This Isn't A Reality Show: How Social Media Livestreams Of High-Profile Criminal Trials May Violate One's Right To A Fair Trial, Ryan Fenn
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
Since the invention of television in 1927, the American legal system faced drastic changes. In 1935, the first trial was broadcast to the public in the case of Bruno Hauptmann. During the trial, “[e]laborate telegraph equipment” was installed in the courtroom, with “sound and motion picture equipment . . . plainly visible in the [courtroom] balcony.” From 1935 on, broadcasting technology has been utilized in the courtroom to convey the inner workings of certain courts to the public, which has stimulated debate over whether the use of this technology is conducive to a fair trial under the Sixth and …
Whose Rights Matter More—Police Privacy Or A Defendant’S Right To A Fair Trial?, Laurie L. Levenson
Whose Rights Matter More—Police Privacy Or A Defendant’S Right To A Fair Trial?, Laurie L. Levenson
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
The function of the prosecutor under the federal Constitution is not to tack as many skins of victims as possible to the wall. His function is to vindicate the right of the people as expressed in the laws and give those accused of crime a fair trial.
– William O. Douglas
Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Darryl K. Brown, Robert P. Burns, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar, Jessica L. West
Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Darryl K. Brown, Robert P. Burns, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar, Jessica L. West
Jeffrey Bellin
No abstract provided.
Brief For Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Robert P. Burns, Sherman J. Clark, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar
Brief For Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Robert P. Burns, Sherman J. Clark, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar
Jeffrey Bellin
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Figueroa, Erik Lindemann
Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Figueroa, Erik Lindemann
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Darryl K. Brown, Robert P. Burns, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar, Jessica L. West
Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Darryl K. Brown, Robert P. Burns, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar, Jessica L. West
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Brief For Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Robert P. Burns, Sherman J. Clark, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar
Brief For Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Robert P. Burns, Sherman J. Clark, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Mu'min V. Virginia: Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments Do Not Compel Content Questions In Assessing Juror Impartiality, Cheryl A. Waddle
Mu'min V. Virginia: Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments Do Not Compel Content Questions In Assessing Juror Impartiality, Cheryl A. Waddle
Akron Law Review
This note synopsizes the Supreme Court's prior decisions regarding the adequacy of voir dire in capital cases surrounded by prejudicial pretrial publicity. This note will then discuss Mu'Min and explore the weaknesses in the Court's analogies to its prior decisions. Next, the note will propose arguments in favor of mandating content questioning. Finally, this note will explore possible nonconstitutional reasons for requiring content questioning in cases where juror partiality should be presumed.
Self-Incrimination: Are Underlying Questions About A Pending Conviction On Appeal A Violation Of A Defendant's Fifth Amendment Privilege Against Self-Incrimination?, Macdonald R. Drane Iv
Self-Incrimination: Are Underlying Questions About A Pending Conviction On Appeal A Violation Of A Defendant's Fifth Amendment Privilege Against Self-Incrimination?, Macdonald R. Drane Iv
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Balancing The Scales: Adhuc Sub Judice Li Est Or Trial By Media, Casey J. Cooper
Balancing The Scales: Adhuc Sub Judice Li Est Or Trial By Media, Casey J. Cooper
Casey J Cooper
The right to freedom of expression and free press is recognized under almost all major human rights instruments and domestic legal systems—common and civil—in the world. However, what do you do when a fundamental right conflicts with another equally fundamental right, like the right to a fair trial? In the United States, the freedom of speech, encompassing the freedom of the press, goes nearly unfettered: the case is not the same for other common law countries. In light of cultural and historic facts, institutional factors, modern realities, and case-law, this Article contends that current American jurisprudence does not take into …
Appellate Division, First Department, People V. Dillard, Edward Puerta
Appellate Division, First Department, People V. Dillard, Edward Puerta
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Balancing The Scales: Adhuc Sub Judice Li Est Or "Trial By Media", Casey J. Cooper
Balancing The Scales: Adhuc Sub Judice Li Est Or "Trial By Media", Casey J. Cooper
Casey J Cooper
The right to freedom of expression and free press is recognized under almost all major human rights instruments and domestic legal systems—common and civil—in the world. However, what do you do when a fundamental right conflicts with another equally fundamental right, like the right to a fair trial? In the United States, the freedom of speech, encompassing the freedom of the press, goes nearly unfettered: the case is not the same for other common law countries. In light of cultural and historic facts, institutional factors, modern realities, and case-law, this Article contends that current American jurisprudence does not take into …
Subverting Brady V. Maryland And Denying A Fair Trial: Studying The Schuelke Report, Bennett L. Gershman
Subverting Brady V. Maryland And Denying A Fair Trial: Studying The Schuelke Report, Bennett L. Gershman
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
The Schuelke Report about the ill-fated federal prosecution of the late-Senator Ted Stevens is an extraordinary contribution to criminal procedure. No other official documentation or investigative study of a criminal prosecution to my knowledge has dissected and analyzed as carefully and thoroughly the sordid and clandestine actions of a team of prosecutors who zealously wanted to win a criminal conviction at all costs. In examining this Report, one gets the feeling that as the investigation and prosecution of Senator Stevens unfolded, and the prosecution’s theory of guilt unraveled, the prosecutors became indifferent whether the defendant was really guilty; they just …
Why Strickland Is The Wrong Test For Violations Of The Right To Testify, Daniel J. Capra, Joseph Tartakovsky
Why Strickland Is The Wrong Test For Violations Of The Right To Testify, Daniel J. Capra, Joseph Tartakovsky
Washington and Lee Law Review
A criminal accused has a constitutional right to testify in his own defense. The right has an undisputed place alongside the most important “personal” rights, like the right to remain silent or the right to represent oneself. But in the 1990s, courts began to apply the ineffective-assistance test of Strickland v. Washington to evaluate claims by a defendant that his right to testify was abridged. In practice this nullifies the right. Moreover, the Strickland test is inapposite because it focuses on counsel and not the defendant’s right to testify. This Article proposes a new test to better secure and enforce …
The T-Rex Without Teeth: Evolving Strickland V. Washington And The Test For Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel, Robert R. Rigg
The T-Rex Without Teeth: Evolving Strickland V. Washington And The Test For Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel, Robert R. Rigg
Pepperdine Law Review
In Strickland v. Washington the United States Supreme Court formulated the test for determining whether counsel in a criminal case is ineffective. When the Court decided Strickland it created a doctrine of enormous proportions, but with little impact--a legal tyrannosaurus rex without teeth. In the last decade, by using American Bar Association (“ABA”) standards to evaluate counsel's performance, the Court has given the T-Rex some sizable incisors. The purposes of this article are to: (1) determine how frequently the United States Supreme Court uses ABA standards in its decisions and describe briefly for what purposes the Court uses those standards; …
Supreme Court Criminal Law Jurisprudence: Fair Trials, Cruel Punishment, And Ethical Lawyering—October 2009 Term, Richard Klein
Supreme Court Criminal Law Jurisprudence: Fair Trials, Cruel Punishment, And Ethical Lawyering—October 2009 Term, Richard Klein
Richard Daniel Klein
No abstract provided.
Caperton, Due Process, And Judicial Duty: Recusal Oversight In Patrons’ Cases, Steve Sheppard
Caperton, Due Process, And Judicial Duty: Recusal Oversight In Patrons’ Cases, Steve Sheppard
Steve Sheppard
In celebration of the life of Judge William E. Enfield, this article discusses the necessity of granting all litigants the right to fair trials with impartial judges. Judges should recuse themselves from cases that involve conflicts of interest, which may result in partiality from the bench. However, judges do not always opt for recusal, even when their impartiality is in question. In Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (2009), the Court evaluated West Virginia Supreme Court Justice Brent Benjamin’s decision not to disqualify himself from a case involving a litigant who made large contributions to his election …
Supreme Court Criminal Law Jurisprudence: Fair Trials, Cruel Punishment, And Ethical Lawyering—October 2009 Term, Richard Klein
Supreme Court Criminal Law Jurisprudence: Fair Trials, Cruel Punishment, And Ethical Lawyering—October 2009 Term, Richard Klein
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Brady-Based Prosecutorial Misconduct Claims, Buckley, And The Arkansas Coram Nobis Remedy, J. Thomas Sullivan
Brady-Based Prosecutorial Misconduct Claims, Buckley, And The Arkansas Coram Nobis Remedy, J. Thomas Sullivan
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Media, The Jury, And The High-Profile Defendant: A Defense Perspective On The Media Circus, John C. Meringolo
The Media, The Jury, And The High-Profile Defendant: A Defense Perspective On The Media Circus, John C. Meringolo
NYLS Law Review
No abstract provided.
Trust Me, I’M A Judge: Why Binding Judicial Notice Of Jurisdictional Facts Violates The Right To Jury Trial, William M. Carter Jr.
Trust Me, I’M A Judge: Why Binding Judicial Notice Of Jurisdictional Facts Violates The Right To Jury Trial, William M. Carter Jr.
Articles
The conventional model of criminal trials holds that the prosecution is required to prove every element of the offense beyond the jury's reasonable doubt. The American criminal justice system is premised on the right of the accused to have all facts relevant to his guilt or innocence decided by a jury of his peers. The role of the judge is seen as limited to deciding issues of law and facilitating the jury's fact-finding. Despite these principles,judges are reluctant to submit to the jury elements of the offense that the judge perceives to be . routine, uncontroversial or uncontested.
One such …
Right To Trial By Jury, Court Of Appeals People V. Knowles
Right To Trial By Jury, Court Of Appeals People V. Knowles
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
It Was A Very Good Year - For The Government: The Supreme Court's Major Criminal Rulings Of The 1995-1996 Term, William E. Hellerstein
It Was A Very Good Year - For The Government: The Supreme Court's Major Criminal Rulings Of The 1995-1996 Term, William E. Hellerstein
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
In Search Of The Post-Positivist Jury, Mark Cammack
In Search Of The Post-Positivist Jury, Mark Cammack
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.