Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- ALI (1)
- American Law Institute (1)
- Arciniega v. Freeman (1)
- Blanks v. Jiggetts (1)
- Camara v. Municipal Court (1)
-
- Dejarnette v. Commonwealth (1)
- Durham v. United States (1)
- Jackson v. Indiana (1)
- Jackson v. Morrison (1)
- Latta v. Fitzharris (1)
- Leland v. Oregon (1)
- Life Insurance Company of Virginia v. Cashatt (1)
- M'Naghten (1)
- Martinv. United States (1)
- McBride (1)
- National Institute of Law and Research (1)
- People v. Anderson (1)
- People v. Coffman (1)
- People v. Hernandez (1)
- People v. Thompson (1)
- Professor Wade (1)
- Restatement of Restitution (1)
- Shaw (1)
- Smith v. Greenberg (1)
- Smith v. United States (1)
- Snider v. Smyth (1)
- State v. Cullison (1)
- State v. Simms (1)
- UPC (1)
- Uniform Probate Code (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Rights Of The Convicted Felon On Parole, Howard E. Hill
Rights Of The Convicted Felon On Parole, Howard E. Hill
University of Richmond Law Review
The forfeiture of various civil rights upon conviction of a felony is no modem innovation. Conviction of a crime in the Roman Republic resulted in the deprivation of many of the same rights denied convicted felons today. Most statutes define a "felony" in terms of the possible punishment for a particular act rather than in descriptions of the actual conduct forbidden. In Virginia "such offenses as are punishable with death or confinement in the penitentiary are felonies," while "all other offenses are misdemeanors." One unfortunate enough to be convicted of a felony becomes subject to sanctions imposed by the state. …
Virginia's Insanity Defense: Reform Is Imperative, William C. Waddell Iii
Virginia's Insanity Defense: Reform Is Imperative, William C. Waddell Iii
University of Richmond Law Review
Virginia is no exception to the statement that a great deal of time and energy has been expended by writers in addressing the defense ofinsanity. Unfortunately, instead of generating some notable reform, this fact has served to desensitize the legislators, the legal profession, and the public in this controversial area. In view of the current knowledge in the field of psychiatry, the approach for implementing the insanity defense in Virginia courts is not satisfactory.
Sentencing In Criminal Cases: How Great The Need For Reform?, Anthony P. Giorno
Sentencing In Criminal Cases: How Great The Need For Reform?, Anthony P. Giorno
University of Richmond Law Review
For many years, the sentencing process of the criminal justice system sought to achieve four goals: deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation of the offender, and retribution for society and the victim. The achievement of these goals was implemented in the majority of jurisdictions through imposition of an indeterminate sentence and discretionary release by an administrative body-traditionally a parole board. This approach allowed courts to announce relatively long sentences as a deterrent to future criminal behavior and to placate the victim and society, but tempered the punishment by allowing early release on an individual basis as soon as the offender had been rehabilitated.
Barring Slayers' Acquisition Of Property Rights In Virginia: A Proposed Statute, Sandra Gross Schneider
Barring Slayers' Acquisition Of Property Rights In Virginia: A Proposed Statute, Sandra Gross Schneider
University of Richmond Law Review
The above passage by Justice Benjamin Cardozo clearly reflects the age-old maxim of the common law, Nullus commodurn caperepotest de injuria sua propria, which expounds the philosophy that no individual shall profit from his own wrong. The present Virginia statute concerning homicide and succession to property was enacted by the legislature to reflect this common law policy. However, because of the very narrow scope of the statute and the requirement that it be strictly construed, it is presently inadequate to respond to many of the issues facing our judges in Virginia. Section 64.1-18 of the Virginia Code states that no …