Law Commons^™

Electronic Surveillance, Computers, And The Fourth Amendment - The New Telecommunications Environment Calls For Reexamination Of Doctrine, Arthur R. Landever

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

We are in the midst of a revolution in information collection and telecommunications. Computer networking, the unification of the various telecommunications systems, the establishment of central data banks, and government tracking and profiling of vast numbers of Americans present momentous challenges for our constitutional system. Increasingly, in our evolving culture, an individual enters the public setting in order to conduct his personal life. Fourth Amendment doctrine respecting electronic surveillance, as well as Supreme Court notions of "free choice" and "assumption of risk" must come to grips with this new reality. In the main, the author urges judicial intervention, as the …

"Plain Crazy:" Lay Definitions Of Legal Insanity, Valerie P. Hans, Dan Slater

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The 1982 Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity (NGRI) verdict in the trial of John Hinckley, Jr., would-be assassin of President Reagan, again has brought to the forefront long-standing public dissatisfaction in the United States with the insanity plea. In the wake of the Hinckley verdict, proposals for reform or abolition of the insanity defense have been submitted to both houses of the U.S. Congress and to state legislatures throughout the nation (Cunningham, 1983). Fueling this reform movement is apparent public dissatisfaction with the insanity plea as it is currently defined.

In contrast to voluminous literature concerning legal and psychiatric …

Kentucky Law Survey: Criminal Procedure, William H. Fortune, Sarah N. Welling

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Significant criminal procedure decisions of the Kentucky appellate courts for the period July 1, 1982 to July 1, 1983, have been selected for discussion in this Survey. Included in this survey is an extensive discussion of selected cases in the areas of warrants, competency of counsel, pretrial discovery of witness statements, venue, belated attacks on criminal convictions, and the right to talk to an attorney before taking a breathalyzer test.

The "Discovery" Of Sexual Abuse: Experts' Role In Legal Policy Formulation, D. Kelly Weisberg

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Admissibility Of Prior-Action Depositions And Formertestimony Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(A)(4) Andfed. R. Evid. 804(B)(1): Courts Differinginterpretations, J. Randall Coffey

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Miranda: The Case, The Man, And The Players, Yale Kamisar

Reviews

On the eve of America's bicentennial, the American Bar Association told its members of a plan to publish a book about the "milestone events" in 200 years of American legal history, and invited them to vote on the milestones to be included. When the balloting was over, Miranda v. Arizona1 - "the high-water mark" of the Warren Court's revolution in American criminal procedure2 - had received the fourth highest number of votes.3 I venture to say that if members of the general public had been asked to list the "most regrettable" or "most unfortunate" milestones in American legal history, Miranda …

Rethinking Self-Incrimination In Great Britain, Mark Berger

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

Evidence: Survey Of Recent Developments In Indiana Law, J. Alexander Tanford

Articles by Maurer Faculty

With rare exceptions, Indiana evidence law progresses slowly and holds closely to the traditional concepts of the common law. This Survey Article collects the several important cases decided during the past year that continue this development of Indiana's common law of evidence. A general word of caution is in order concerning the Indiana appellate courts' evidence cases. Most evidence issues arise in criminal cases, in which convicted defendants allege error in the admission of evidence against them or in the exclusion of evidence offered in their defense. A ruling in favor of the defendant could result in the reversal of …

Review Essay On Becoming And Being A Prosecutor, Martin H. Belsky

Akron Law Faculty Publications

A prosecutor is a detective, a litigator, a manager, and a policymaker. He is responsible for investigating illegalities' and is permitted to use specially assigned tools-a grand jury or subpoena-to acquire information and evidence. As a litigator, he is counsel for an artificial client-the government or people-but also the representa- tive of identifiable victims. Moreover, though he functions in an adversary system, he must temper his advocacy and zeal. His goal is not merely to "win," but also to see that "justice is done."

The prosecutor must manage an increasing set of responsibilities in a complex and often arbitrary system, …

Children Of The Night: The Adequacy Of Statutory Treatment Of Juvenile Prostitution, D. Kelly Weisberg

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Sexual Abuse Of Children: Recent Developments In The Law Of Evidence, D. Kelly Weisberg

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Transfer Taxation Without Transfer: Reflections On Employer-Provided Death Benefits, Section 2039, Disclaimers, New Forms Of Wealth, And The Evolution Of The Federal Estate Tax, Edward A. Zelinsky

Articles

No abstract provided.

Timing Under A Unified Wealth Transfer Tax, Theodore S. Sims

Faculty Scholarship

The United States taxes gifts made while an individual is living more leniently than it taxes wealth transfers at death. Although in some measure this disparity has existed since the enactment of the modern estate and gift taxes in 1916 and 1932, it was significantly narrowed by the Tax Reform Act of 1976 (the 1976 Act). That statute replaced the separate gift and estate taxes with a regime that taxes the cumulative total of an individual's lifetime taxable gifts and his taxable estate at death, under a single (or "unified") graduated table of rates. Nevertheless, there remains a signficant difference …

Taking Witherspoon Seriously: The Search For Death-Qualified Jurors, Eric Schnapper

Articles

This Article assesses, in light of fifteen years of judicial experience under Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968), the meaning and impact of that decision and the practical and legal problems that arise in its application. The analysis draws heavily on actual voir dires reported in published opinions and considers the problems that judges and attorneys face when attempting to distinguish jurors who cannot be excluded under Witherspoon(commonly referred to as "death-qualified" jurors) from jurors who may be excluded for cause. Part II discusses the ways in which Witherspoon altered the law regarding jury selection in capital …

Criminal Procedure - Removing The Third Option From The Jury - State V. Strickland, Lisa Boutelle Hardin

Campbell Law Review

Prior to the North Carolina Supreme Court's holding in State v. Strickland, the rule governing second degree murder jury instructions in a first degree murder case was clear. In all murder cases in which the prosecution relied on the elements of premeditation and deliberation to prove that first degree murder had been committed, the trial judge was required to submit the issue of second degree murder to the jury. This rule came from the Court's unanimous decision in State v. Harris. The Court adhered to this rule in several later cases until it heard Strickland in 1983. Apparently …

New York V. Quarles:The "Public Safety" Exception To Miranda, John Randolph Bode

University of Richmond Law Review

In New York v. Quarles, the Supreme Court attempted to limit the exclusionary sanction provided under Miranda v. Arizona. Quarles is a significant decision in the criminal procedure area not only because of the exception which it establishes, but because it represents "a legitimate effort by the Burger Court to reconcile the realities of effective law enforcement with the often hyper technical rules of criminal justice." Many observers have interpreted the Quarles decision as the long-awaited fruition of the conservatism now presiding over the Burger Court. However, the setting for Quarles can be traced back to the Miranda decision itself.

Right Against Self-Incrimination -- "Public Safety" Exception, David C. Williams

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The Felony-Murder Rule: A Doctrine At Constitutional Crossroads, Nelson E. Roth, Scott E. Sundby

Articles

No abstract provided.

Virginia's Capital Murder Sentencing Proceeding: A Defense Perspective, Alan W. Clarke

University of Richmond Law Review

Capital murder trials present a unique challenge to defense counsel. Many capital defendants are demonstrably guilty of heinous crimes, and a single-minded defense concentrating solely on acquittal in the face of overwhelming evidence of guilt will often alienate the jury. The lawyer who focuses entirely on the guilt stage without attending to the sentencing stage may be consigning his client to the electric chair. This article deals with the sentencing phase of a capital murder trial, where life imprisonment, the jury's only alternative to the death penalty, represents a victory for the defense.

Winfield V. Commonwealth: The Application Of The Virginia Rape Shield Statute, Philip L. Hatchett

University of Richmond Law Review

In Winfield v. Commonwealth, the Virginia Supreme Court held that the state's recently enacted rape shield statute could not restrict or infringe upon the defendant's sixth amendment right under the United States Constitution to confront his accusers. In overruling the trial judge, the court stated that section 18.2-67.7 of the Code of Virginia actually expanded the admissibility of evidence related to specific prior sexual conduct of the prosecutrix. By this ruling, Virginia has joined a minority of jurisdictions which have refused to recognize the special dilemma of the prosecutrix in a rape trial and to grant additional protections under her …

Kentucky Law Survey: Criminal Procedure, William H. Fortune

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

On Complaining About The Burger Court, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Federal Coconspirator Exception: Action, Assertion, And Hearsay, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Race And The Decision To Detain A Suspect, Sheri Johnson

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Sufficiency-Weight Distinction - A Matter Of Life Or Death, Michael Seward

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Guilt Should Be Irrelevant: Government Overreaching As A Bar To Reprosecution Under The Double Jeopardy Clause After Oregon V. Kennedy, James F. Ponsoldt

Scholarly Works

This article examines the effect of Oregon v. Kennedy on the Burger Court's double jeopardy jurisprudence in cases where government misconduct has interfered with the integrity of a first trial. The article proposes the complete elimination of current distinctions between mistrial and appellate reversal cases for double jeopardy analysis, on the ground that those distinctions no longer have intellectual or practical support. Moreover, against the contention of the Court in Oregon v. Kennedy that any test for overreaching necessarily would be standardless, this article proposes the adoption of a "plain error" standard. Under this test, "plain" government error, engaged in …

The Burden Of Proof In Double Jeopardy Claims, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that once the defendant raises a nonfrivolous double jeopardy claim that turns on a question of fact, the government should have the burden of proving that the two crimes charged are actually different. Part I traces the development of the law and the major factors behind recent federal court scrutiny of the traditional rule. Part II argues that constitutional considerations require courts to shift the burden of proof to the government, not only when practical considerations suggest the shift, but in all cases turning on questions of fact. Finally, Part III reconciles this allocation with the well-established …

Schall V. Martin, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

James V. Kentucky, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Segura V. United States, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.