Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Katz v. United States (3)
- Terry v. Ohio (2)
- United States v. Watson (2)
- Beck v. Ohio (1)
- Bill of Rights (1)
-
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the FederalBureau of Narcotic (1)
- Boyd v. United States (1)
- Brewer v. Williams (1)
- Brown v. Commonwealth (1)
- Bumper v. North Carolina (1)
- Bushell's (1)
- Cale v. City of Covington (1)
- Camera v. Municipal Court (1)
- Carlson v. Green (1)
- Carratt v. Commonwealth (1)
- Chambers v. Maroney (1)
- City of Charlotte v. Local 660 (1)
- City of Kenosha v. Bruno (1)
- Cort v. Ash (1)
- Cosby v. Commonwealth (1)
- Craft v. Commonwealth (1)
- Davis v. Passman (1)
- Deagle v. Commonwealth (1)
- Delaware v. Prouse (1)
- Drug paraphernalia (1)
- Duncan v. Louisiana (1)
- Fierst v. Commonwealth (1)
- Fowlkes v. Commonwealth (1)
- Fox's Libel Act (1)
- Fraud Act (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
When Cops Are Robbers-Municipal Liability For Police Misconduct Under Section 1983 And Bivens, Brenda D. Crocker
When Cops Are Robbers-Municipal Liability For Police Misconduct Under Section 1983 And Bivens, Brenda D. Crocker
University of Richmond Law Review
Municipalities faced with rising crime rates, tighter budgets and an increasingly vocal populace often are pressed to make policy decisions which sacrifice important interests. When fiscal considerations predominate, there arises the danger that local police departments will be unable to fulfill their duty to ensure order in society without disturbing citizens' enjoyment of their civil rights. Until recently, improperly trained, supervised or disciplined police of- ficers merely subjected municipalities to embarrassment. However, with increasing success, citizens are arguing that they should be awarded damages against the municipality in every case where their civil rights have been deprived through police misconduct. …
Rhode Island V. Innis: A Workable Definition Of "Interrogation"?, Deborah L. Fletcher
Rhode Island V. Innis: A Workable Definition Of "Interrogation"?, Deborah L. Fletcher
University of Richmond Law Review
In Rhode Island v. Innis, the Supreme Court addressed for the first time the issue of what constitutes interrogation under Miranda v. Arizona. Innis is a significant decision in the criminal procedure area not only because of the workable standard for determining "interrogation" which it sets forth, but also because it signals the Burger Court's decision not to overrule Mirandaor to further disparage its effectiveness. However, Innis by no means represents a return to the Warren Court's solicitous approach to a suspect's Miranda rights. The Burger Court still has not raised Miranda's protections and strictures to the status of constitutionally …
The New Warrant Requirements: Payton V. New York And Wallace V. King, Robert B. Lloyd Jr.
The New Warrant Requirements: Payton V. New York And Wallace V. King, Robert B. Lloyd Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
Since the original Bill of Rights was drafted, the diverse warrant requirements necessary for reasonable searches and seizures under the fourth amendment have led to chaos and confusion. A dichotomy has existed between the requirements necessary for the search and seizure of property and those necessary for the search and seizure of persons. Generally, a warrant has been required when the object of the search and seizure was property while no warrant has been necessary for the seizure of an individual. The Supreme Court decision in Payton v. New York has erased much of this distinction, holding that the fourth …
Criminal Procedure And Criminal Law: Virginia Supreme Court Decisions During The 70'S, Michael J. Barbour, Thomas E. Carr, Sarah H. Finley, Jeannie L. Pilant
Criminal Procedure And Criminal Law: Virginia Supreme Court Decisions During The 70'S, Michael J. Barbour, Thomas E. Carr, Sarah H. Finley, Jeannie L. Pilant
University of Richmond Law Review
The purpose of this note is to examine the decisions of the Virginia Supreme Court during the period between 1970-1980 in the area of criminal procedure and substantive criminal law. Legislative changes will not be dealt with in depth except as they have affected these decisions. Because of space constraints, a complete review of all areas is impossible; therefore, review has been limited to those issues most likely to be of interest to the practicing attorney. The discussion will also attempt to establish the position of the Virginia Supreme Court on these matters in relation to the United States Supreme …
Public Access To Criminal Trials: Richmond Newspapers, Inc. V. Virginia, Christopher C. Spencer
Public Access To Criminal Trials: Richmond Newspapers, Inc. V. Virginia, Christopher C. Spencer
University of Richmond Law Review
Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia is, in the words of Justice Stevens, a "watershed case." For the first time, the Court recognized that some sort of first amendment right of access to government proceedings exists. The Court, in a plurality opinion (joined by two Justices, accompanied by five concurring opinions and one dissent), held that the right of the public to attend criminal trials is "implicit in the guarantees of the First Amendment."
A Case For Jury Determination Of Search And Seizure Law, Ronald J. Bacigal
A Case For Jury Determination Of Search And Seizure Law, Ronald J. Bacigal
University of Richmond Law Review
In a criminal case the option to return a general verdict of acquittal invests the jury with the raw power to nullify many legal determinations, including the trial judge's ruling that a search is constitutional. While courts grudingly acknowledge the existence of an extra-legal jury nullification power, courts do not recognize any jury prerogative to determine the lawfulness of a search. The United States Supreme Court's discussion of the jury's role in interpreting and applying the fourth amendment consists of one terse statement that the legality of a search "is a question of fact and law for the court and …
Virginia's Drug Paraphernalia Law, Michael J. Barbour
Virginia's Drug Paraphernalia Law, Michael J. Barbour
University of Richmond Law Review
With the enactment of sections 18.2-265.1 through -265.4 of the Virginia Code, Virginia has joined a growing number of states attempting to prohibit the sale of drug paraphernalia. Virginia's new drug paraphernalia law is designed to remedy a previously existing anomaly in Virginia: possession and sale of controlled substances were criminal offenses, yet the sale of devices facilitating the use of controlled substances was permissible.