Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Gates, Leon, And The Compromise Of Adjudicative Fairness (Part Ii): Of Aggressive Majoritarianism, Willful Deafness, And The New Exception To The Exclusionary Rule, Joel Jay Finer
Cleveland State Law Review
Part I examined in a dialogue form the idea that Justice White and other members of the Leon majority had prejudged issues of law in earlier cases––pre-committed themselves in violation of their duty of impartiality––by elaborating in detailed, cohesive, comprehensive opinions, reasons why existing law was incorrect and had to be changed to permit a "good-faith, objective police reasonableness" exception to the exclusionary rule. These prejudgments precluded fair consideration of the merits in Leon. Beyond that, the Leon opinion itself, considered in view of the arguments of counsel and the scholarship in currency, evinced an agenda-driven pre-commitment to its outcome; …
Gates, Leon, And The Compromise Of Adjudicative Fairness (Part I): A Dialogue On Prejudicial Concurrences, Joel Jay Finer
Gates, Leon, And The Compromise Of Adjudicative Fairness (Part I): A Dialogue On Prejudicial Concurrences, Joel Jay Finer
Cleveland State Law Review
This two-part Article is about certain qualities of fairness –those qualities that although subtle, are central to the idea and spirit of justice in adjudication. This Article is about how those qualities were subverted in the process by which the doctrine of United States v. Leon became law. Part I of the Article –A Dialogue on Prejudicial Concurrences–published herein, suggests that several members of the Leon majority (particularly its author, Justice White) were unable to impartially adjudicate the constitutional question because of pre-decisional gratuitous opinions (from the bench) on the subject. More specifically, the Dialogue explores the virtually unquestioned assumption …