Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Academic Publications (4)
- Tennessee Supreme Court Amicus Curiae/Amici Curiae Briefs (2)
- 12-hour hold (1)
- 48-Hour Hold (1)
- Cooling-down period (1)
-
- County of Riverside v. McLaughlin (1)
- Domestic Violence (1)
- Due process (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Gerstein v. Pugh (1)
- Investigative Hold (1)
- Judicial Hold (1)
- Right to bail (1)
- Search and seizure (1)
- Separation of powers (1)
- Substantial Compliance Doctrine (1)
- Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-121 (1)
- Tennessee Health Care Liability Act (1)
- Tennessee Medical Malpractice (1)
- Vanderbilt Rape Records (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Tennessee Supreme Court Brief Of Amici Curiae Domestic And Sexual Violence Prevention Advocates, Daniel A. Horwitz Esq.
Tennessee Supreme Court Brief Of Amici Curiae Domestic And Sexual Violence Prevention Advocates, Daniel A. Horwitz Esq.
Daniel A. Horwitz
No abstract provided.
Twelve Angry Hours: Improving Domestic Violence Holds In Tennessee Without Risk Of Violating The Constitution, Daniel A. Horwitz
Twelve Angry Hours: Improving Domestic Violence Holds In Tennessee Without Risk Of Violating The Constitution, Daniel A. Horwitz
Daniel A. Horwitz
Tennessee law currently provides that individuals who have been arrested for certain domestic violence offenses “shall not be released within twelve (12) hours of arrest if the magistrate or other official duly authorized to release the offender finds that the offender is a threat to the alleged victim.” However, Tennessee law also provides for an exception to this “12-hour hold” requirement that permits judges to release domestic violence arrestees before twelve hours have elapsed “if the official determines that sufficient time has or will have elapsed for the victim to be protected.” Following an especially high-profile incident of domestic violence …
A Picture’S Worth A Thousand Words: Why Ballot Selfies Are Protected By The First Amendment, Daniel A. Horwitz
A Picture’S Worth A Thousand Words: Why Ballot Selfies Are Protected By The First Amendment, Daniel A. Horwitz
Daniel A. Horwitz
On August 11, 2015, U.S. District Court Judge Paul Barbadoro held in Rideout v. Gardner that a New Hampshire law prohibiting the digital distribution of photos of a marked ballot – popularly known as a “ballot selfie” – was “invalid because it is a content-based restriction on speech that cannot survive strict scrutiny.” Immediately thereafter, Judge Barbadoro’s opinion generated substantial criticism from prominent election law scholars – most notably Richard Hasen – who argued that permitting “ballot selfies” would open up the electoral process to vote buying and voter coercion.
This Article responds to such criticism, arguing that ballot selfie …
The Law Of Unintended Consequences: Avoiding The Health Care Liability Act Booby Trap, Daniel A. Horwitz
The Law Of Unintended Consequences: Avoiding The Health Care Liability Act Booby Trap, Daniel A. Horwitz
Daniel A. Horwitz
In 2009, interest groups representing both healthcare providers and injured patients worked together to draft and pass several amendments to Tennessee's medical malpractice statute that aimed to improve medical malpractice litigation for all involved. As a result of these reforms, however, the 2009 amendments unexpectedly caused several cases to be dismissed without prejudice on grounds unrelated to the substantive merits of plaintiffs' claims due to their attorneys' technical procedural missteps. What has gone largely unrecognized, however, is a fatal litigation trap lurking beneath the surface of Tennessee's Health Care Liability Act that currently functions to transform even dismissals without prejudice …
The First 48: Ending The Use Of Categorically Unconstitutional Investigative Holds In Violation Of County Of Riverside V. Mclaughlin, Daniel A. Horwitz
The First 48: Ending The Use Of Categorically Unconstitutional Investigative Holds In Violation Of County Of Riverside V. Mclaughlin, Daniel A. Horwitz
Daniel A. Horwitz
This Article critiques the holding adopted by a growing number of courts that law enforcement may delay a warrantless arrestee’s constitutional right to receive a judicial determination of probable cause for up to forty-eight hours following an arrest as long as a judge or magistrate ultimately determines that the arrest itself was supported by probable cause. Although this issue has largely escaped review within academic literature, the practice of employing investigative detentions against warrantless arrestees is widespread among law enforcement. Of note, whether such investigative detentions comport with the Fourth Amendment has also generated a circuit split between the Eighth …
Tennessee Supreme Court Brief Of Amicus Curiae Tennessee Association Of Criminal Defense Lawyers: State V. Herron, No. W2012–01195–Sc–R11–Cd, 2015 Wl 1361262 (Tenn. Mar. 26, 2015), Daniel A. Horwitz
Daniel A. Horwitz
Brief of Amicus Curiae Tennessee Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers: State v. Herron, No. W2012–01195–SC–R11–CD, 2015 WL 1361262 (Tenn. Mar. 26, 2015)