Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 9 of 9

Full-Text Articles in Law

Qualified Immunity Developments: Not Much Hope Left For Plaintiffs, Karen Blum, Erwin Chemerinsky, Martin A. Schwartz Jun 2017

Qualified Immunity Developments: Not Much Hope Left For Plaintiffs, Karen Blum, Erwin Chemerinsky, Martin A. Schwartz

Erwin Chemerinsky

No abstract provided.


Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky Jun 2017

Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky

Erwin Chemerinsky

No abstract provided.


The Supreme Court's Love-Hate Relationship With Miranda, Kit Kinports Jan 2016

The Supreme Court's Love-Hate Relationship With Miranda, Kit Kinports

Kit Kinports

In recent years, the Supreme Court has enjoyed a love-hate relationship with its landmark decision in Miranda v. Arizona. While the Court has not hesitated to narrow Miranda’s reach, it has also been wary of deliberate efforts to circumvent it. This pragmatic approach to Miranda can be doctrinally unsatisfying and even incoherent at times, but it basically maintains the core structure of Miranda as the police have come to know and adapt to it. Last Term provided the first glimpse of the Roberts Court’s views on Miranda, as the Court considered three Miranda cases: Maryland v. Shatzer, Florida v. Powell, …


The Improper Use Of Presumptions In Recent Criminal Law Adjudication, Charles W. Collier Aug 2015

The Improper Use Of Presumptions In Recent Criminal Law Adjudication, Charles W. Collier

Charles W. Collier

This note argues that, in developing the contemporary mandatory-permissive standard, the Supreme Court has misunderstood the effects of presumptions on juries. Presumptions that are ‘permissive’ in theory may nevertheless be ‘mandatory’ in fact, thereby leading some juries to convict regardless of their beliefs and inclinations. Thus, these legal presumptions may undermine the moral sense and political function of the jury. Part I of this note shows, through doctrinal analysis, that the mandatory-permissive distinction is an anomaly in the Court's jurisprudence. Part II shows that this distinction is at variance with a substantial body of empirical social science research. This part …


Section 1983 Civil Rights Litigation From The October 2006 Term, Martin Schwartz Jun 2014

Section 1983 Civil Rights Litigation From The October 2006 Term, Martin Schwartz

Martin A. Schwartz

No abstract provided.


New Paths For The Court: Protections Afforded Juveniles Under Miranda; Effective Assistance Of Counsel; And Habeas Corpus Decisions Of The Supreme Court’S 2010/2011 Term, Richard Klein Oct 2013

New Paths For The Court: Protections Afforded Juveniles Under Miranda; Effective Assistance Of Counsel; And Habeas Corpus Decisions Of The Supreme Court’S 2010/2011 Term, Richard Klein

Richard Daniel Klein

No abstract provided.


Qualified Immunity Developments: Not Much Hope Left For Plaintiffs, Karen Blum, Erwin Chemerinsky, Martin A. Schwartz Oct 2013

Qualified Immunity Developments: Not Much Hope Left For Plaintiffs, Karen Blum, Erwin Chemerinsky, Martin A. Schwartz

Martin A. Schwartz

No abstract provided.


An Analysis Of The Death Penalty Jurisprudence Of The October 2007 Supreme Court Term (The Twentieth Annual Supreme Court Review), Richard Klein Dec 2010

An Analysis Of The Death Penalty Jurisprudence Of The October 2007 Supreme Court Term (The Twentieth Annual Supreme Court Review), Richard Klein

Richard Daniel Klein

No abstract provided.


Justice By The Numbers: The Supreme Court And The Rule Of Four-Or Is It Five?, Ira P. Robbins Dec 2001

Justice By The Numbers: The Supreme Court And The Rule Of Four-Or Is It Five?, Ira P. Robbins

Ira P. Robbins

INTRODUCTION:

In the early hours of April 14, 2000, Robert Lee Tarver died in Alabama's electric chair, even though four Justices of the United States Supreme Court had voted to review the merits of his case. This situation is not unique. Each year, practitioners and pro se litigants alike petition the Supreme Court without fully knowing the rules pursuant to which the Court will decide their client's, or their own, fate. The reason is that the Supreme Court operates under two sets of rules-those that are published and those that are not. The former specify This Article is based on …