Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Convicting The Innocent Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: Some Lessons About Jury Instructions From The Sheppard Case, Lawrence M. Solan
Convicting The Innocent Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: Some Lessons About Jury Instructions From The Sheppard Case, Lawrence M. Solan
Cleveland State Law Review
Indeed, it is difficult to prove one's innocence, and the legal system purports not to require defendants in criminal cases to do so. The shift in the burden of proof happened for a number of reasons. In this article, I will discuss another factor that I believe pervades the criminal justice system: jury instructions that shift the burden from the government to the defendant. Part II of this article establishes three criteria for good criminal jury instructions. They are fidelity to the law, comprehensibility, and consistency with the presumption of innocence. It then discusses the presumption of innocence, burden of …
Voluntary Manslaughter After Patterson: An Analysis Of Ohio Law, Margaret M. Higgins
Voluntary Manslaughter After Patterson: An Analysis Of Ohio Law, Margaret M. Higgins
Cleveland State Law Review
Ohio courts have struggled to divine the constitutional mandate of the reasonable doubt standard while simultaneously attempting to give a viable interpretation to the state's relatively new manslaughter law. Their approach has resulted in an unusual definition of manslaughter which has proven particularly unworkable. In addition, several other problems have developed as a result of the enactment of the manslaughter law. First, the policy espoused by the Supreme Court in its decisions has been abrogated under Ohio law. Second, Ohio law nearly abandons the distinction between murder and manslaughter. This is especially dangerous in light of the presumption of criminal …
Voluntary Manslaughter After Patterson: An Analysis Of Ohio Law, Margaret M. Higgins
Voluntary Manslaughter After Patterson: An Analysis Of Ohio Law, Margaret M. Higgins
Cleveland State Law Review
Ohio courts have struggled to divine the constitutional mandate of the reasonable doubt standard while simultaneously attempting to give a viable interpretation to the state's relatively new manslaughter law. Their approach has resulted in an unusual definition of manslaughter which has proven particularly unworkable. In addition, several other problems have developed as a result of the enactment of the manslaughter law. First, the policy espoused by the Supreme Court in its decisions has been abrogated under Ohio law. Second, Ohio law nearly abandons the distinction between murder and manslaughter. This is especially dangerous in light of the presumption of criminal …