Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
Cleveland State Law Review
The United States Supreme Court, in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, had a magnificent opportunity to either begin the process of defining first amendment limitations on the scope of the authority of the FCC to regulate the content of broadcast expression, explicate a rational ground for the differential status of broadcasting, or perhaps both. The purpose of this article is not to debate the wisdom of the use of sensitive language on the electronic media or elsewhere. Nor is it our purpose to debate the substantive question of whether the Court reached the proper result in Pacifica, although we will necessarily …
State V. Roberts: A Persuasive But Unsupported Position, Robert A. Boyd
State V. Roberts: A Persuasive But Unsupported Position, Robert A. Boyd
Cleveland State Law Review
The Ohio Supreme Court recently held in State v. Roberts that when a witness is unavailable at the trial of a criminal defendant, the state may not introduce the witness' preliminary hearing testimony into evidence unless he had been cross-examined at the preliminary hearing. The court found that the defendant, Roberts, had been denied his right to confront an adverse witness when the trial court admitted the preliminary hearing testimony of a witness who was not present at trial, and held that mere opportunity to cross-examine at a preliminary hearing, unexercised, did not satisfy the demands of the Confrontation Clause …
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
Cleveland State Law Review
The United States Supreme Court, in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, had a magnificent opportunity to either begin the process of defining first amendment limitations on the scope of the authority of the FCC to regulate the content of broadcast expression, explicate a rational ground for the differential status of broadcasting, or perhaps both. The purpose of this article is not to debate the wisdom of the use of sensitive language on the electronic media or elsewhere. Nor is it our purpose to debate the substantive question of whether the Court reached the proper result in Pacifica, although we will necessarily …