Law Commons^™

Trial And Appellate Criminal Procedure, John M. Schmolesky

Faculty Articles

Recent state and federal decisions significantly influenced Texas criminal procedure at both the trial and appellate levels. These decisions generally affected three main areas of the punishment stage of Texas criminal trials. First, they defined the scope of evidence admissible at the punishment stage. Second, they addressed procedural and substantive questions concerning the special punishment issue of use or exhibition of a deadly weapon. Third, they raised substantial questions about the constitutionality of the death penalty as applied by Texas courts.

Texas courts also faced numerous challenges in the aftermath of several important state and federal constitutional decisions. These decisions …

Just Compensation And The Condemnation Of Future Interests: Empirical Evidence Of The Failure Of Fair Market Value, Laura H. Burney

Faculty Articles

Just compensation for future interests should be directly responsive to the Fifth Amendment by directly addressing its dictate rather than detouring through objective standards which stress valuation rather than fairness. It is generally inappropriate to strictly adhere to any one predetermined standard in compensating owners whose property has been taken. The reasons behind the rules that govern the compensation awarded to an owner whose property has been taken have not vanished. However, these rules are frequently forsaken. If the United States Supreme Court is taken at its word, the normative basis for providing just compensation in all takings cases should …

When Soldiers Are Defendants, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

In O’Callahan v. Parker, the U.S. Supreme Court adopted a “service connection” requirement for court-martial subject matter jurisdiction. For almost two decades that requirement caused numerous problems of interpretation and application. In Solorio v. United States, the Court overruled its decision in O’Callahan. While assigned to a Coast Guard unit in Juneau, Alaska, the accused committed numerous acts of sexual abuse against two minor daughters of other Coast Guard members. The crimes were not discovered, however, until after he had been transferred to Governors Island, New York, where he committed additional acts of sexual abuse on other daughters of Coast …

Investigative Detentions For Purposes Of Fingerprinting, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

This article focuses on constitutional issues associated with fingerprinting suspects in investigative detention. Following a series of barracks larcenies, Naval Investigative Service (NIS) investigators fingerprinted approximately 100 servicemembers. All those ordered to report to the NIS office for fingerprinting had been present in the unit at the time of the offenses, and among those was the accused, who was later linked to the crime through his fingerprints. Before the accused reported to the NIS office there was no probable cause or reasonable suspicion to believe that he was in any way involved in the crimes. Were the fingerprints admissible?

United …

The Permissible Scope Of Texas Automobile Inventory Searches In The Aftermath Of Colorado V. Bertine: A Talisman Is Created, Gerald S. Reamey, Michael H. Bassett, John A. Molchan

Faculty Articles

The fourth amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. The warrant and probable cause requirements advance this constitutionally implied privacy right. However, with respect to automobile searches, strict adherence to these safeguards has been eschewed in favor of more flexible, and arguably less protective, versions of reasonableness.

In 1981, in Gill v. State, the Texas court addressed the permissible scope of inventory searches, holding that the police may not search the locked trunk of an automobile while conducting an inventory search. Despite the simplicity of the Gill rule, a number of recent cases, while …

A Uniform Rule Governing The Admission And Practice Of Attorneys Before United States District Courts, Michael S. Ariens

Faculty Articles

The increase in the interstate and international practice of law necessitates a review of the rules governing the admission of attorneys to practice before federal district courts. By virtue of the sweep of their jurisdictional net, federal district courts are likely to be the fora for litigating most interstate or international disputes. The present rules, based upon the antiquated notion that lawyers only rarely practice law in federal district court, and then only in the federal district court located in the state in which they practice, do not address this change in the practice of law.

For these reasons, a …

New Jersey V. T.L.O.: The Supreme Court's Lesson On School Searches Symposium On Education Law., Gerald S. Reamey

St. Mary's Law Journal

Considerable disagreement persists as to the fourth amendment rights of students within schools. Particularly, this disagreement regards the extent to which fourth amendment rights possessed by students may frustrate reasonable attempts by educators to maintain the order necessary to preserve an educational environment. In New Jersey v. T.L.O., the Supreme Court considered an argument advanced by the State of New Jersey that the “pervasive supervision” of school children diminishes the legitimate expectation of privacy a child may have in property “unnecessarily” brought to school. The Court concluded that the necessity of maintaining security and order in the educational environment was …

Mueller V. Allen: A Fairer Approach To The Establishment Clause, Michael S. Ariens

Faculty Articles

The decision upheld by the United States Supreme Court in Mueller v. Allen helds a new dawn in establishment clause jurisprudence. This five-to-four decision, written for the majority by Justice Rehnquist, upheld a Minnesota statute permitting taxpayers to deduct the tuition, textbook, transportation, and instructional material expenses of their children when calculating their state tax liability. By this decision, the Court has cleared the way for an accommodation between church and state that more equitably recognizes the principles and values that the religion clauses were intended to protect.

Following a review of the history of the establishment clause, tuition tax …

Federalism And Supreme Court Review Of Expansive State Court Decisions: A Response To Unfortunate Impressions, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

This article addresses the Burger Supreme Court’s approach to federalism and concludes that the Court seems to be reordering federal-state judicial relations. This reordering appears to be occurring at the expense of both state autonomy and individual liberties, especially the rights of state criminal defendants.

Although there certainly have been cases which suggest the Burger Court has a lopsided federalism, upon thorough analysis of these cases, this determination is shown to be incorrect. In fact, the present Court greatly respects state autonomy and the independence of state courts. Further, the Supremacy Clause requires the Court to serve as final arbiter …

New Jersey V. T.L.O.: The Supreme Court’S Lesson On School Searches, Gerald S. Reamey

Faculty Articles

Considerable disagreement persists as to the fourth amendment rights of students within schools. Particularly, this disagreement regards the extent to which fourth amendment rights possessed by students may frustrate reasonable attempts by educators to maintain the order necessary to preserve an educational environment.

In New Jersey v. T.L.O., the Supreme Court considered an argument advanced by the State of New Jersey that the “pervasive supervision” of school children diminishes the legitimate expectation of privacy a child may have in property “unnecessarily” brought to school. The Court concluded that the necessity of maintaining security and order in the educational environment was …

Constitutional Law—Presidential Immunity—The President Is Absolutely Immune From Civil Damages Liability For Acts Done Within The “Outer Perimeter” Of His Official Capacity (Casenote), Laura H. Burney

Faculty Articles

The Supreme Court theorized absolute immunity for the President must be found in the separation of powers doctrine. Because of the broad range and sensitive nature of the President's responsibilities, his constant visibility, and the judicial deference he has historically been accorded, the Court concluded in Nixon v. Fitzgerald that civil damages suits would unduly distract the President from his official duties. Furthermore, because the President's actions can affect innumerable people, the Court feared the scrutiny inherent in civil damages suits would be overly intrusive. Accordingly, the Court considered it too difficult to align a particular result with one of …

Rule 3, The Enabling Act, And Statutes Of Limitations, David A. Dittfurth

Faculty Articles

Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure appears to be a model of simplicity and clarity. It describes the process for commencement of a civil action, and in defining “commencement” appears to provide guidance on how to begin an action which complies with a statute of limitations.

As a result of the decision in Walker v. Armco Steel Corp., that appearance is misleading regarding state statutes of limitations applicable in federal court actions brought on the basis of diversity of citizenship jurisdiction. There, the Court made reference only to state statutes of limitations, and expressly avoided deciding the …

The Younger Abstention: Primary State Jurisdiction Over Law Enforcement, David A. Dittfurth

Faculty Articles

The abstention doctrines have received much attention by the United States Supreme Court over the last decade. These doctrines are represented by judicial rules that require federal trial courts, in appropriate circumstances, to abstain from exercising subject matter jurisdiction although they clearly have the power to do so. As a result, the particular case is shunted back into a state judicial system for determination.

The most confusing of these doctrines is the one arising in major part from Younger v. Harris. In short, this case stands for the rule that, once a state criminal prosecution has been initiated, a federal …

Judicial Reasoning And Social Change, David A. Dittfurth

Faculty Articles

Some have begun to doubt whether courts adequately respond to recent social problems. Formulated rules, principles, and statutes govern a case in court, and these commanding communications addressed to judges theoretically guide and control the decision-making process. Rules, although often imprecise, are subjected to the scrutiny of the legal profession, which is trained to interpret their meaning and possible application in different fact situations. This, in turn, promotes a high degree of social and political stability since there is less ambiguity as to what constitutes permissible or required behavior.

Attitudes, social institutions, language, and critical decision making are all factors …