Law Commons^™

The News And The Accused, Lawrence W. Schad

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The author believes that the Reardon Standards, if implemented, would provide an effective solution to the problem of prejudicial information, and that this potential can be best realized through adoption and enforcement of the Standards by the courts. This conclusion is based upon analysis of the following issues: (1) The nature of the problem, including an examination of (a) the nature of prejudicial information, (b) those who create the problem either by initially releasing or subsequently disseminating such information, and (c) the related effect of courtroom procedure upon the impact of such information. An analysis of these issues suggests …

A Reappraisal Of Implied Consent And The Drinking Driver, Paul R. Dimond

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This article examines how the law operates, the rights and duties of the state and of the individual, how problems of interpretation should be resolved and whether the present law most effectively balances state and individual interests. The article concludes with suggestions for reform of the law and a reconsideration of ways to control the drinking driver.

Recent Cases, Law Review Staff

Vanderbilt Law Review

Bar Admissions-The Character Investigation as an Unconstitutional Scheme to Promote Conformity: Comment on "LSCRRC v. Wadmond"

============================

Civil Rights--Desegregation--HEW is Required to Make a Program-by-Program Finding of Discrimination in Order to Terminate Federal Funds Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

============================

Constitutional Law--Civil Rights-Section 1985(3) Does Not Reach Private Conspiracies

============================

Constitutional Law--Criminal Procedure--Sixth Amendment Does Not Require Right to Counsel for In-Custody Suspects at Photographic Identifications

============================

Constitutional Law--Equal Protection--States May Not Require More Than a Simple Majority to Authorize Local Bond Issues and Tax Levies Through Popular Election

============================

Constitutional Law--Reapportionment--Multi-Member Districts Which Minimize …

False Or Suppressed Evidence: Why A Need For The Prosecutorial Tie?, Ronald L. Carlson

Scholarly Works

Many United States Supreme Court decisions have overturned criminal convictions for the reason that the government employed false evidence to obtain the conviction or failed to disclose relevant evidence important to the defense. In reversing federal or state judgments, the Court often has located direct proof of wrongdoing by the prosecutor. The notorious “bloody shorts” case is an example in point. There, the state introduced as evidence a pair of men’s “blood-stained” undershorts to achieve conviction of the accused. When the blood turned out to be red paint, the Supreme Court granted habeas corpus relief to the defendant because “[ilt …

False Or Suppressed Evidence: Why A Need For The Prosecutorial Tie, Ronald L. Carlson

Scholarly Works

Many United States Supreme Court decisions have overturned criminal convictions for the reason that the government employed false evidence to obtain the conviction or failed to disclose relevant evidence important to the defense. In reversing federal or state judgments, the Court often has located direct proof of wrongdoing by the prosecutor. The notorious "bloody shorts" case is an example in point.' There, the state introduced as evidence a pair of men's "blood-stained" undershorts to achieve conviction of the accused. When the blood turned out to be red paint, the Supreme Court granted habeas corpus relief to the defendant because "[it …

Supreme Court Of Texas Is Without Jurisdiction To Grant A Writ Of Mandamus To Direct A District Judge To Dismiss An Indictment In A Criminal Case On The Ground That Relator Was Denied A Speedy Trial., John A. Pizzitola

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract Forthcoming.

11-19-1969 Correspondence From Burger To Stewart, Warren E. Burger

Brockington v. Rhodes, 396 U.S. 41 (1969)

Dear Potter:

I concur in your per curiam.

11-19-1969 Correspondence From Harlan To Stewart, John Harlan

Brockington v. Rhodes, 396 U.S. 41 (1969)

Dear Potter:

This is simply to confirm my earlier verbal comunication to you of my agreement with your opinion as recirculated on November 5, 1969.

11-12-1969 Justice Harlan, Per Curiam, John Harlan

DeBacker v. Brainard, 396 U.S. 28 (1969)

After a hearing before a juvenile court judge, appellant DeBacker was found to be a "delinquent child" and ordered committed to the Boys Training School at Kearney, Nebraska. DeBacker did not seek direct review of his commitment, but instead sought state habeas corpus. The Nebraska District Court dismissed appellant's petition, a divided Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, and last Term we noted probable jurisdiction over the present appeal. 393 U. S. 1076. Because we find that resolution of the constitutional issues presented

11-04-1969 Correspondence From Harlan To Stewart, John Harlan

Brockington v. Rhodes, 396 U.S. 41 (1969)

I agree entirely with the result you reach in this case, and with all of the opinion, except I have trouble with two minor matters.

11-06-1969 Correspondence From White To Stewart, Byron R. White

Brockington v. Rhodes, 396 U.S. 41 (1969)

Dear Potter:

Please join me.

11-05-1969 Justice Stewart, Per Curiam, Potter Stewart

Brockington v. Rhodes, 396 U.S. 41 (1969)

The appellant sought to run in the November 1968 election as an independent candidate for the United States House of Representatives from the Twenty-First Congressional District of Ohio. His nominating pettition bore the signatures of 899 voters in the congressional district, a little over 1% of those in the district who had voted in the gubernatorial contest at the last election.

11-05-1969 Justice Black, Dissenting, Hugo L. Black

DeBacker v. Brainard, 396 U.S. 28 (1969)

In February 1968 appellant, who was then 17 years old, was charged under the laws of Nebraska with being a "delinquent child" because he had forged bank check which he intended to use for his own purposes. At the hearing on this charge he asked for a jury trial, arguing this was a right guaranteed him by the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution and that a statute prohibiting juries in "delinquency" proceedings was therefore unconstitutional.

11-04-1969 Correspondence From Brennan To Stewart, William J. Brennan

Brockington v. Rhodes, 396 U.S. 41 (1969)

Dear Potter:

I voted the other way at the conference but you've convinced me.

Book Notes, Law Review Staff

Vanderbilt Law Review

Identification & Police Line-ups By William E. Ringle New York: Gould Publications, 1968. Pp. x, 211. $5.00 (Paper)

==========================

Metropolitan Decision Processes: An Analysis of Case Studies By Morris Davis & Marvin G. Weinbaum. Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1969. Pp. xx; 131.

==========================

The Impact of Supreme Court Decisions Edited by Theodore L. Becker. New York: Oxford University Press, 1969. Pp. 213. $2.50 (Paper).

==========================

The Limits of the Criminal Sanction By Herbert L. Packer.Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1968. Pp. xi, 385. $8.95.

Homicide And Succession To Property, William M. Mcgovern Jr.

Michigan Law Review

Today, most jurisdictions bar a killer from succeeding to his victim's property. The traditional rationale for that result is that a criminal should not be allowed to enrich himself by his crime. Assuming that this principle is sound, its application in individual cases often proves troublesome. What would happen, for example, if the crime were of a lesser degree than murder, and the killer had no intent to enrich himself? If the killer is barred, who should take what would have been his share under a will? Or, if the decedent and murderer held property jointly, should the killer forfeit …

10-31-1969 Correspondence From Stewart To Harlan, Potter Stewart

DeBacker v. Brainard, 396 U.S. 28 (1969)

Dear John,

I am glad to join the Per Curiam you have written in this case.

10-31-1969 Justice Stewart, Per Curiam, Potter Stewart

Brockington v. Rhodes, 396 U.S. 41 (1969)

The appellant sought to run in the November 1968 election as an independent candidate for the United States House of Representatives from the Twenty-First Congressional District of Ohio. His nominating pettition bore the signatures of 899 voters in the congressional district, a little over 1% of those in the district who had voted in the gubernatorial contest at the last election.

10-30-1969 Correspondence From White To Harlan, Byron R. White

DeBacker v. Brainard, 396 U.S. 28 (1969)

Dear John:

Please join me.

10-30-1969 Correspondence From Burger To Harlan, Warren E. Burger

DeBacker v. Brainard, 396 U.S. 28 (1969)

Dear John:

I concur in your excellent per curiam opinion.

10-30-1969 Justice Harlan, Per Curiam, John Harlan

DeBacker v. Brainard, 396 U.S. 28 (1969)

After a hearing before a juvenile court judge, appellant DeBacker was found to be a "delinquent child" and ordered committed to the Boys Training School at Kearney, Nebraska. DeBacker did not seek direct review of his commitment, but instead sought state habeas corpus. The Nebraska District Court dismissed appellant's petition, a divided Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, and last Term we noted probable jurisdiction over the present appeal. 393 U.S. 1076. Because we find that resolution of the constitutional issues presented by appellant would not be appropriate in the circumstances of this case, the appeal was dismissed. See Rescue Army v. …

10-28-1969 Correspondence From Marshall To Burger, Thurgood Marshall

Alexander v. Holmes County Bd. of Educ., 396 U.S. 19 (1969)

Dear Chief:

I now assume that it is impossible to get unanimity on cut-off dates. On that assumption I could agree to the draft of WJB even though I would otherwise prefer the Harlan draft.

10-28-1969 Correspondence From Harlan To Burger, John M. Harlan

Alexander v. Holmes County Bd. of Educ., 396 U.S. 19 (1969)

Supplementing my earlier letter of today, I thought it might be convenient for you and the Brethren to have in "unitary" form the per curiam -order that would result from the proposals made in that letter. The following would eventuate.

10-28-1969 Correspondence From Harlan To Burger, John M. Harlan

Alexander v. Holmes County Bd. of Educ., 396 U.S. 19 (1969)

I spent last evening reviewing the various circulations that have been made respecting the disposition of this ease. In light of the variety of views that have been expressed at our recent Conferences, and looking at the matter from an institutional standpoint, I have come to the view that the most satisfactory disposition of the case would be that suggested In the proposed order embodied in Mr. Justice Marshall's circulation of October 27, preceded by the preamble of your circulations of October 25 and 27, but unaccompanied by an opinion as suggested in your second circulation of yesterday. I think, …

10-28-1969 Correspondence From Harlan To Burger, John Harlan

Alexander v. Holmes County Bd. of Educ., 396 U.S. 19 (1969)

Dear Chief:

I am prepared to concur in your circulation of this afternoon, with the two minor modifications suggested below. My readiness to do this reflects what I hope was implicit in my two earlier letters of today, namely, that we have reached the point in our deliberations where the differences amongst us hang not on any matters of substance but on pure semantics. Frankly, I think the important thing now is to reach an agreement on some disposition which can be announced at the earliest possible moment, preferably not later than tomorrow afternoon.

10-28-1969 Correspondence From Black To Burger, Hugo L. Black

Alexander v. Holmes County Bd. of Educ., 396 U.S. 19 (1969)

I regret that I again find myself unable to agree with the opinion and order circulated yesterday afternoon in the above case.

10-28-1969 Correspondence From Brennan To Burger, William J. Brennan

Alexander v. Holmes County Bd. of Educ., 396 U.S. 19 (1969)

For me, the prime objective of what we me tn these cases is to remove the impression of HEW and the Justice Department that the standard of "all deliberate speed'' retains some vitality. I fear that that message is obscured by your proposed opinion. MY view is that we should state the message in the briefest and plainest possible words. The proposal you circulated at Conference yesterday based on Hugo's suggestions strikes me as a model upon which to build.

10-28-1969 Memorandum To The Conference, Warren E. Burger

Alexander v. Holmes County Bd. of Educ., 396 U.S. 19 (1969)

Enclosed "another try" in light of various proposals received. It returns to what I proposed to the Conference except (a) the preamble is altered and (b) the dates are omitted. Indeed, it contains most elements of what all of us agree to. If all agree, I suggest that we consider a "Cooper and Allen", reciting of all members of the Court rather than a per curiam because because of the importance of the problem.

10-27-1969 Memorandum To The Conference, Thurgood Marshall

Alexander v. Holmes County Bd. of Educ., 396 U.S. 19 (1969)

Here are my suggestions for changes in the proposed Order by the Chief Justice. As you will note, these changes are suggested to replace the Order itself as contrasted to the preliminary paragraphs.

10-26-1969 Memorandum To The Conference, Hugo L. Black

Alexander v. Holmes County Bd. of Educ., 396 U.S. 19 (1969)

The letter from the Chief Justice circulated in connection with the proposed order and judgment in this case suggests that the proposal now has the approval of three members of the Court. It is possible that this proposal will obtain a majority and that the Court may want to issue the order on Monday. Should that be the case, I would not want to delay such action, but will dissent as I have in the opinion circulated herewith.