Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Review Of The Law And Process Of Post-Conviction Remedies By Ira P. Robbins, Larry Yackle
Review Of The Law And Process Of Post-Conviction Remedies By Ira P. Robbins, Larry Yackle
Faculty Scholarship
There are days when the availability of the federal writ of habeas corpus as a vehicle for challenging criminal convictions collaterally seems assured. The arrival of Professor Robbins' new casebook is itself strong, affirmative evidence. At last a major publishing house has acknowledged that the great body of habeas corpus statutes, rules, and precedents warrants a full-length, hard-bound casebook for classroom use. Implicitly, surely, the publisher assumes that the postconviction writ is here to stay, that it forms a stable and legitimate part of our jurisprudence. 3 At the same time, some members of the Court, particularly Chief Justice Burger …
The Reagan Administration's Habeas Corpus Proposals, Larry Yackle
The Reagan Administration's Habeas Corpus Proposals, Larry Yackle
Faculty Scholarship
"Democracy," said Churchill, "means that if the door bell rings in the early hours, it is likely to be the milkman." He might have added that if the caller is not the milkman, but a police officer, Anglo-American democracy contemplates that the writ of habeas corpus will be available to the citizen awakened and dragged off into the darkness. The Great Writ has no substantive content of its own but provides the machinery for putting claims before state and federal courts-for translating substantive principles of liberty into effective law. The writ is process, but more than process. It is the …
The Exhaustion Doctrine In Federal Habeas Corpus: An Argument For A Return To First Principles, Larry Yackle
The Exhaustion Doctrine In Federal Habeas Corpus: An Argument For A Return To First Principles, Larry Yackle
Faculty Scholarship
The exhaustion doctrine in federal habeas corpus contemplates not the relinquishment of federal jurisdiction to determine the merits of federal claims arising in state criminal prosecutions, but the appropriate timing of an undoubted federal power to adjudicate in due course. Simply stated, the doctrine postpones federal review until petitioners have exhausted state judicial remedies still available for the treatment of their federal claims at the time they wish to apply for federal relief. The resulting delay is justified on the twin grounds that earlier federal intervention would disrupt the orderly administration of state criminal prosecutions and deprive the state courts …