Law Commons^™

04-15-1981 Justice White, Per Curiam, Byron R. White

Flynt v. Ohio, 451 U.S. 619 (1981)

On July 14. 1976, criminal complaints were issued against petitioners charging them with disseminating obscenity in violation of Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 2907.32. The Municipal Court granted petitioners' motions to dismiss the complaints on the ground that petitioners had been subjected to selective and discriminatory prosecution in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court of Appeals of Ohio reversed, finding the evidence insufficient to support petitioners' allegations of selective and discriminatory prosecution. The case was remanded for trial. The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed. We granted certiorari. -U.S.- (1980). Because the decision of the Ohio Supreme …

04-15-1981 Correspondence From Rehnquist To White, William H. Rehnquist

Flynt v. Ohio, 451 U.S. 619 (1981)

Dear Byron:

Please join me in your Per Curiam.

Hearing On Child Molestation Legislation - April 10, 1981, Joint Committee For Revision Of The Penal Code

California Joint Committees

SB 276, SB 277, SB 278, SB 586, SB 587, SB 588.

03-28-1981 Correspondence From Powell To Burger, Lewis F. Powell

Beltran v. Myers, 451 U.S. 625 (1981)

Dear Chief:

At Conference yesterday, I stated that I might be persuaded to join a DIG, although I agreed with Bill Brennan on the merits.

03-27-1981 Notes From Oral Argument, Harry A. Blackmun

Flynt v. Ohio, 451 U.S. 619 (1981)

The thoughts of all of the Justices are recorded.

03-27-1981 Notes From Oral Argument, Harry A. Blackmun

Beltran v. Myers, 451 U.S. 625 (1981)

Harry A. Blackmun's handwritten notes from oral argument.

03-24-1981 Notes From Oral Argument, Harry A. Blackmun

Flynt v. Ohio, 451 U.S. 619 (1981)

Harry A. Blackmun's handwritten notes.

03-24-1981 Notes From Oral Argument, Harry A. Blackmun

Beltran v. Myers, 451 U.S. 625 (1981)

Harry A. Blackmun's handwritten notes from oral argument.

03-22-1981 Notes From Oral Argument, Harry A. Blackmun

Flynt v. Ohio, 451 U.S. 619 (1981)

Harry A. Blackmun's handwritten notes from oral argument.

03-21-1981 Correspondence To Blackmun, Unknown

Beltran v. Myers, 451 U.S. 625 (1981)

Here is some light Sunday reading for you. I apologize for the handwritten corrections; ATEX went "down" before I could finish proofreading this monster.

03-18-1981 Correspondence From Rehnquist To White, William H. Rehnquist

Beltran v. Myers, 451 U.S. 625 (1981)

As you know , we have discussed with one another the possible jurisdictional problems in this case, and I would be the first to admit that it is an extremely "close call" if we were to say that the Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1257, which I believe is the only general statute giving us jurisdiction over "final judgments or decrees rendered by the highest court of a State in which a decision could be had. " I am troubled by the fact that the respondent did not raise this point in his memorandum in opposition to certiorari …

Book Review: A Theory Of Criminal Justice By Jan Corecki. New York: Columbia University Press. 1979. Pp. Xv, 185. $15.00., Ira Robbins

Book Reviews

Review of A Theory of Criminal Justice by Jan Corecki. New York: Columbia University Press. 1979. Pp. xv, 185. $15.00.

01-21-1981 Preliminary Memorandum, Unknown

Beltran v. Myers, 451 U.S. 625 (1981)

SUMMARY: On Nov. 3, the Court granted cert limited to the question of whether California's application of a transfer of assets rule to its medically needy aged, blind, and disabled applicants for Medicaid, resulting in the denial of assistance to individuals otherwise eligible, contradicts the applicable portions of the Social Security Act and thus violates the Supremacy Clause. On Dec. 23, the President signed legislation that will explicitly permit states to employ a transfer of assets rule to applicants for Medicaid. Petr seeks summary reversal and remand on the ground that the new legislation confirms that Calif.'s application of a …

Assuring Effective Assistance Of Counsel, William W. Schwarzer

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Commentary: Rummel V. Estelle: Mockingbirds Among The Brethren, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

In this commentary Professor Lasson discusses the Supreme Court's decision in Rummel v. Estelle and reveals a poignant personal memorandum that reflects the analysis of human values necessarily performed by whichever Justice cast the deciding vote.

The Practice Of Extradition From Antiquity To Modern France And The United States: A Brief History, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

In order to understand the perceptions of extradition’s function and purpose in modern France and the United States, it is important to consider the evolution of thought regarding extradition. This article will focus on the history of extradition law as it has influenced contemporary law in the United States and France. The purpose of the article is to provide insight into the development of the “modern” extradition. Although the process has not always been executed by use of a treaty agreement, treaty authorized extraditions have existed since antiquity. Moreover, a treaty authorized extradition for common crimes, as opposed to political …

The Juvenile Offender Act: Effectiveness And Impact On The New York Juvenile Justice System, Merril Sobie

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The Juvenile Offender Act of 1978 incorporates the most radical and perhaps the most controversial amendments to New York's juvenile delinquency statutes in several decades. For the first time since 1909, children accused of committing serious offenses are subject to prosecution in the criminal courts. The gradual decriminalization of delinquency, which began a century and a half ago, has been reversed. This report analyzes and evaluates the Act and its implementation. The first two sections summarize the historical development of juvenile delinquency legislation and compare present New York provisions to those in other states. Sections III and IV will evaluate …

Hearings On Community Crime Prevention, Joint Committee For Revision Of The Penal Code

California Joint Committees

Hearings held on Nov. 17, 1981 and Dec. 17, 1981.

Summary Of 1981 Crime Legislation, Joint Committee For The Revision Of The Penal Code

California Joint Committees

This compendium will provide you with a convenient summary and copies of the Legislature's statutory accomplishments in criminal law during the first half of the 1981-1982 session.

All bills enacted during 1981 will become effective January 1, 1982 unless they are urgency measures or were made inoperative. The summaries of the urgency measures specifiy their effective date. Bills that were enacted but will not become operative have been excluded. In some bills only portions of the measure will be inoperative. These sections are clearly labeled on the bills.

Senate and Assembly measures are listed separately, each in ascending numerical order. …

An Ounce Of Prevention: Toward An Understanding Of The Causes Of Violence, Commission On Crime Control And Violence Prevention

California Agencies

Pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 990 of 1979 Statutes (AB 23, Vasconcellos), the Commission on Crime Control and Violence Prevention is pleased to present this Preliminary Report, covering Commission activities and findings through December 30, 1981. The Commission is charged with the investigation of the root causes of violence, and the identification of preventative, proactive measures. That is, we seek ways to encourage human development in environments that prevent the first act of violence, or a violent life· pattern, from occurring.

Murder And The Death Penalty: A Special Report To The People, California Department Of Justice

California Agencies

Th i s Special Report: (1 ) compares pre-1963 when the death penalty was carried out on a regular basis, and post- 1963 when the death penalty was, and continues to be, effectively nullified; (2) provides a history of the death penalty in California; (3) describes the crimes committed by those individuals sentenced to death to show that anyone who resides in a cell on death row arrived there as a result of the commission of a brutal, and often extraordinarily heinous, murder; and ( 4) lists some simple, common sense crime prevent ion techniques which all citizens should be …

Homicide In California, 1981, Department Of Justice

California Agencies

No abstract provided.

Rhode Island V. Innis: “Offhand Comments” Or “Interrogation”?, Kingsley R. Browne

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Retrial After A Hung Jury: The Double Jeopardy Problem, Janet E. Findlater

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Equal Protection And The Prosecutor's Charging Decision: Enforcing An Ideal, Donald G. Gifford

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Admissibility Of Expert Testimony On The Issue Of Eyewitness Identification In Criminal Trials, 2 N. Ill. U. L. Rev. 59 (1981), Edward B. Arnolds, William K. Carroll, Michael P. Seng

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Reliable Identification: Could The Supreme Court Tell In Manson V. Brathwaite, Randolph N. Jonakait

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

An Inventory Of The Criminal Justice Curriculum Of American Law Schools, Paul M. Kurtz

Scholarly Works

The purpose of this study is to examine the structure of the criminal justice curriculum in the American law school. This entails an analysis of what courses are being offered, how many hours of classroom instruction (both required and elective) are available, and when during the educational process the student is exposed to criminal law courses. The reason for undertaking the study is to provide at least a gross picture of what the present situation is as a guide to what we as a profession or as individual schools might like to do by way of improving the structure. Hopefully, …

Mens Rea And The Colorado Criminal Code, Marianne Wesson

Publications

No abstract provided.

The "Perjury Trap", Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

It is the aim of the present Article, first, to explore the boundaries of legitimate grand jury interrogation as it bears on the subject of perjury and, second, to formulate guidelines that strike a balance between the needs of the investigatory process and the rights of witnesses.