Law Commons^™

Rights Of State Prisoners - Federal Court Intervention In State Prison Administration; Jones V. Wittenberg, Ronald L. Collins

Akron Law Review

The path to federal court intervention into state prison administration has been a tortuous and rocky one.... Jones v. Wittenberg carries federal court intervention into state prison administration to new lengths. Until more basic and lasting changes are made on the part of society and the states, such intervention seems to be the best chance for ameliorating conditions in our state penal systems.

Admissibility Of In-Court Identifications; Unnecessarily Suggestive Out-Of-Court Identifications; Due Process; Manson V. Brathwaite, Frank A. Barbieri Jr.

Akron Law Review

Prior to the Supreme Court's decision in Manson v. Brathwaite, a substantial amount of confusion existed concerning the judicial test which was to be applied to in-court and out-of-court criminal identification procedures. The Court, in the case of Stovall v. Denno, had first set forth a two stage test for determining whether such procedures were violative of due process. While later cases were somewhat unclear, the Stovall test continued to be used. When the Court again confronted the identification procedure question in the case of Neil v. Biggers, a new "totality of the circumstances" test was set forth. …

Ohio's Administrative License Suspension: A Double Jeopardy And Due Process Analysis, Max Kravitz

Akron Law Review

This Article examines whether Ohio's imposition of an administrative license suspension "ALS" immediately upon arrest for operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol "OMVI" bars a subsequent prosecution for the substantive offense.' Traditionally, administrative license suspensions have been considered civil, administrative and primarily remedial. However, increasingly punitive amendments to Ohio's ALS statutory scheme raise the substantial question of whether an ALS is truly remedial, or whether the imposition of an ALS constitutes punishment triggering double jeopardy and due process protection.

Bray V. Russell: The Constitutionality Of The "Bad Time" Statute, Erin Kae Cardinal

Akron Law Review

This Note analyzes the Court’s decision in Bray. Part II presents an overview of sentencing systems in the United States, the bad time penalty, and a brief background of the doctrine of separation of powers. Part III presents the facts, procedural history, and holding of Bray. Part IV analyzes the Court’s holding pursuant to the Due Process Clause rather than the doctrine of separation of powers. This Note concludes that although the bad time statute is unconstitutional as a violation of the doctrine of separation of powers, the court could have alternatively decided that the bad time statute also violates …

Implicated But Not Charged: Improving Due Process For Unindicted Co-Conspirators, Raeed N. Tayeh

Akron Law Review

This Comment posits that the practice of publicly naming unindicted co-conspirators before trial violates due process and that unless preventative measures are adopted to halt this practice, such due process violations will continue. This conclusion is buttressed by the text that follows, which surveys the relevant case law on the rights of unindicted co-conspirators, highlights the types of harm that a sample of unindicted co-conspirators have suffered as a result of being publicly named, and proposes procedures and rules that, if adopted, would conform with due process and help prevent these harms.

In this Comment, I will expand on the …