Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Dna Storage Banks: The Importance Of Preserving Dna Evidence To Allow For Transparency And The Preservation Of Justice, Cristina Martin
Dna Storage Banks: The Importance Of Preserving Dna Evidence To Allow For Transparency And The Preservation Of Justice, Cristina Martin
Chicago-Kent Law Review
What is the duty to preserve information in today’s society? In order for humanity to evolve, change and flourish in the future, society needs to preserve its information from the past. In the criminal justice field, preservation of evidence has special significance. DNA evidence in particular has become a helpful aid for innocent defendants who have been improperly imprisoned. Over the past twenty years, the number of exonerations of imprisoned criminal defendants has increased dramatically. With the advancement of technology, old, previously untestable or improperly tested DNA evidence will need to be retested. However, most states do not have proper …
Decision-Making In The Dark: How Pre-Trial Errors Change The Narrative In Criminal Jury Trials, Kara Mackillop, Neil Vidmar
Decision-Making In The Dark: How Pre-Trial Errors Change The Narrative In Criminal Jury Trials, Kara Mackillop, Neil Vidmar
Chicago-Kent Law Review
The jury trial plays a critical constitutional and institutional role in American jurisprudence. Jury service is, technically, the only constitutional requirement demanded of our citizens and, as such, places an important responsibility on those chosen to serve on any jury, especially within the criminal justice system. Jury research has established that, generally, jurors take their responsibilities seriously; they work with the evidence presented at trial and they reach verdicts that correlate to the narratives they develop throughout the trial. But with estimates of wrongful conviction rates as high as five percent in serious felony cases, how are juries getting it …
Summerlin V. Stewart And Ring Retroactivity, Tonya G. Newman
Summerlin V. Stewart And Ring Retroactivity, Tonya G. Newman
Chicago-Kent Law Review
The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants a trial before a jury. Until the Supreme Court decided Ring v. Arizona, however, nine states wholly or partially surrendered a portion of the jury's role to a sentencing judge. Specifically, those states allowed sentencing judges to make factual determinations regarding sentencing considerations by which capital defendants became eligible for the death penalty. The Ring Court halted the use of sentencing considerations to erode the jury's fundamental role in preserving accuracy and fairness of criminal proceedings, holding that the Sixth Amendment requires that a jury make factual findings on all elements, including sentencing …