Law Commons^™

Fourth Amendment--Search Warrants And The Right To Free Press

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

No abstract provided.

Fifth Amendment--Double Jeopardy And The Doctrine Of Dual Sovereignty

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

No abstract provided.

Mandatory Prison Sentences: Their Projected Effects On Crime And Prison Populations, Joan Petersilia, Peter W. Greenwood

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

No abstract provided.

Good Faith And The Fourth Amendment: The Reasonable Exception To The Exclusionary Rule, Edna F. Ball

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

No abstract provided.

Books Reviewed

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

No abstract provided.

Forcible Rape And Statutory Rape: The Delicate Balance Between The Rights Of Victim And Defendant, 11 J. Marshall J. Of Prac. & Proc. 481 (1978), Philip A. Oretsky

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Due Process Dilemma: Pretrial Detention In Juvenile Delinquincy Proceedings, 11 J. Marshall J. Of Prac. & Proc. 513 (1978), Peter A. Shamburek

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Development Of The Federal Law Of Gambling, G. Robert Blakey, Harold A. Kurland

Journal Articles

The Commission on the Review of the National Policy Toward Gambling, believing that the States should have the primary responsibility for determining what forms of gambling may legally take place within their borders, recently suggested that the federal government should prevent interference by one State with the gambling policies of another, and should act to protect identifiable national interests.

Although this broad recommendation reinforces the role the federal government has traditionally played in regulating gambling, the Commission also proposed specific amendments to the cur- rent federal gambling laws. Should Congress act upon the Commission's report or otherwise attempt a comprehensive …

Federal Habeas Corpus And Ineffective Representation Of Counsel: The Supreme Court Has Work To Do, Peter W. Tague

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The availability of federal habeas corpus relief for state criminal defendants has always borne a complex relationship to state rules barring defendants from litigating constitutional claims in state court because of procedural defaults in raising those claims. The Warren Court's landmark attempt to resolve this relationship was the 1963 decision in Fay v. Noia, which asserted that a state procedural forfeiture rule could not bar federal habeas review of a constitutional claim unless the defendant had "deliberately bypassed" the procedural opportunity to raise the claim; the Court defined "deliberate bypass" in terms of a defendant's intentional and voluntary relinquishment of …

Arson Fraud: Criminal Prosecution And Insurance Law, Anne Winslow Murphy, Andrew Maneval

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This comment discusses prosecutions for arson, and more specifically the lack of successful prosecutions of "arson-for-profit," arson that is motivated by an intent to defraud an insurance company. The comment discusses the difficulties in proving arson under both common law and statutory schemes, and various ways to strengthen prosecution of arson fraud. Ultimately the comment concludes that cost may be the most significant obstacle to effective prosecution of the crime of arson, and the power of reform lies with the budget officers of the agencies and elected public officials.

A Trial Court Working With Rule 1100, Merna B. Marshall, Joseph H. Reiter

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

State V. Roberts: A Persuasive But Unsupported Position, Robert A. Boyd

Cleveland State Law Review

The Ohio Supreme Court recently held in State v. Roberts that when a witness is unavailable at the trial of a criminal defendant, the state may not introduce the witness' preliminary hearing testimony into evidence unless he had been cross-examined at the preliminary hearing. The court found that the defendant, Roberts, had been denied his right to confront an adverse witness when the trial court admitted the preliminary hearing testimony of a witness who was not present at trial, and held that mere opportunity to cross-examine at a preliminary hearing, unexercised, did not satisfy the demands of the Confrontation Clause …

The Repressed Issues Of Sentencing: Accountability, Predictability, And Equality In The Era Of The Sentencing Commission, John C. Coffee Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

The existence of disparities in the sentences imposed on equally culpable offenders has long been a subject of jurisprudential concern. The author provides a critique of recent efforts to objectify the sentencing process that rely on a matrix table prescribing guideline sentence lengths on the basis of offense severity and predictions of recidivism. With particular emphasis on the Sentencing Commission authorized by pending federal legislation, he urges the need for political accountability in the body that inevitably makes value judgments in the preparation and administration of such a guideline system. Finally, the author discusses the normative issues that surround the …

Sentencing In Indiana: Appellate Review Of The Trial Court's Discretion, John Eric Smithburn

Journal Articles

Two significant developments, legislative and judicial, have taken place in Indiana criminal law in recent months which may offer an effective response to the problem of unguided discretionary sentencing. The Indiana Penal Code has been revised to require that the trial court, before sentencing a convicted felon, conduct a separate hearing for the purpose of determining the appropriate sentence and to make a record of the hearing which must include a statement of the court's reasons for selecting the sentence imposed. The General Assembly has also provided specific directives which the trial court must consider in determining a proper sentence …

Legal Services, Prisoners' Attitudes And "Rehabilitation.", Geoffrey P. Alpert, John M. Finney, James F. Short Jr

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Mistake Of Fact Defense And The Reasonableness Requirement, Margaret F. Brinig

Journal Articles

This article examines specifically the mistake of fact defense and its disparate treatment under these two systems of justice. The British approach is to retain a subjective element in the mistake of fact defense, while American courts impose an objective "reasonableness" requirement. The substantive criminal law approach, utilizing the concept of mens rea, will be discussed first, and will be followed by a treatment of recent American constitutional developments in the area of burden of proof standards in their criminal context. Finally, two factually similar rape cases, one British and one American, will be analyzed to show the present contrasting …

The Negotiated Guilty Plea: A Framework For Analysis, Richard Adelstein

Richard Adelstein

An early exposition of the price exaction framework and the place of plea bargaining in it.

The Plea Bargain In Theory

Richard Adelstein

A formal dynamic model of plea bargains.

Improving Police Discretion Rationality In Handling Public Inebriates Part Ii, David Aaronson

David Aaronson

No abstract provided.

Changing The Public Drunkenness Laws: The Impact Of Decriminalization, David Aaronson

David Aaronson