Law Commons^™

The Truth Might Set You Free: How The Michael Morton Act Could Fundamentally Change Texas Criminal Discovery, Or Not, Gerald S. Reamey

Faculty Articles

Michael Morton spent twenty-five years in a Texas prison for the murder of his wife, a crime he always denied committing. Following investigation aimed at proving that he was innocent, blatant prosecutorial misconduct came to light. Potentially exculpatory evidence had been hidden by the District Attorney in the case, allowing the actual killer to remain free to kill another victim before finally confessing to his crime. The attention this case attracted brought to light the stingy and discretionary discovery options available to criminal defendants in Texas, who were relegated to hoping that prosecutors would allow access to information in their …

Fraud On The Court And Abusive Discovery, David R. Hague

Faculty Articles

Unbeknownst to many, federal courts have the power under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to set aside judgments entered years earlier that were obtained by “fraud on the court.” Fraud on the court, however, can take many forms and courts and commentators agree that it is a nebulous concept. The power to set aside a judgment requires courts to strike a balance between the principles of justice and finality. A majority of courts require a showing, by clear and convincing evidence, of intentional fraudulent conduct specifically directed at the court itself. This standard is flawed. And courts that have …

False Security: How Courts Have Improperly Rendered The Protections Of The Protective Order Illusory, Ramona L. Lampley

Faculty Articles

The protective order is perhaps one of the most useful and “taken for granted” discovery devices contemplated by the Colorado and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The purpose of a joint protective order in civil litigation is to permit the parties to produce business information without fear that the information will be disseminated publicly, and with a court order that the information be used only for purposes of the present litigation. Blanket protective orders serve the interests of a just, speedy, and less expensive determination of complex disputes by alleviating the need for and delay occasioned by extensive and repeated …

The Anticipation Misconception, Colin P. Marks

Faculty Articles

Many commentators and courts have cited to the Supreme Court decision of Hickman v. Taylor as the genesis of the work product doctrine and the requirement that, to be afforded protection, the material in question must be generated “in anticipation of litigation.” The oft quoted policy justification for the protection afforded is that attorneys should be allowed a “zone of privacy” within which to prepare their case for the client. This justification supports limiting protection only to work generated “in anticipation of litigation,” because, presumably, outside of this context there is no need for the “zone of privacy.” However, a …

Comment: The Ninth Amendment: A Constitutional Challenge To Corporal Punishment In Public Schools, David R. Hague

Faculty Articles

The Supreme Court's refusal to resolve the conflict over corporal punishment in public schools perpetuates the uncertainty over children and parents' legal rights. The use of corporal punishment in public schools unconstitutionally abridges parents' right to direct the upbringing of their children because it forces parents to accept the emotional and physical marks that corporal punishment leaves on their children. In 1977, the Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of corporal punishment in Ingraham v. Wright. The Court held that the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment applied only to criminal punishments and thus provided no protection against …

Criminal Law And Procedure, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals annually decides , or in some other way disposes of, several hundred cases which might be considered to fall within the topic of criminal law and procedure. Several conclusions can be drawn from the cases decided by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals during this survey period.

First, the court continues to adhere to a posture which reflects trust in the trial and pretrial process. That is, like most appellate courts, it views its role not as simply another forum for correcting all of the mistakes that have occurred in either the pretrial or …