Law Commons^™

Interim Hearing, Committee On Environmental Safety And Toxic Materials, Subcommittee On Toxic Disaster Preparedness, Assembly Committee On Environmental Safety And Toxic Materials

California Assembly

No abstract provided.

10-29-1985 Correspondence From Marshall To O'Connor, Thurgood Marshall

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

Dear Sandra:

Please add the following to your Per Curiam:

JUSTICE MARSHALL dissents from this summary disposition, which has been ordered without affording the parties prior notice or an opportunity to file briefs on the merits. See Maggio v. Fulford, 462 U.S. 111, 120- 121 (1983) (MARSHALL, J ., dissenting); Wyrick v. Fields, 459 u.s. 42, 51- 52 (1982) (MARSHALL, dissenting).

Judicial Notice October 28th, 1985 V12 N3, The Catholic University Of America, Columbus School Of Law

Judicial Notice

No abstract provided.

The Forum (Volume 16, Number 2), Valparaiso University School Of Law

Valparaiso Law School Forum

No abstract provided.

Woolsack 1985 Volume 26 Number 3, University Of San Diego School Of Law Student Bar Association

Newspaper, The Woolsack (1963-1987)

Table of Contents:

Successful Return of Ed Meese to USD

Justice Cruz Reynoso: The California Supreme Court: The Balance Which Protects· Democracy by Lenor Avila

Mayor Hedgecock's Guilty Verdict

In the USD Law News: Briefly

Trivia dicta ...This Month: Criminal Law

In Memory: Kevin Briscoe

State of the School Adress by Doug Friednash

Editorial: Unenforced and Unenforceable

Think before you think

I Refuse To Read One More Case

Around and about

Profiling San Diego Practitioner. This month-F.B.I. Profile: Larry Campbell by Julie Cardenas

Hosted visiting dignitaries: U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese III. Inside the Justice Department by C. Naranjo,

Board …

Newsletter - 1985-10-24, E. De La Garza

Kika de la Garza Congressional Papers - Newsletters

No abstract provided.

Divestiture And Telecommunications Deregulation: Impact On Service And Labor, Assembly Committee On Utilities And Commerce

California Assembly

No abstract provided.

Vol. 34, No. 7, October 23, 1985, University Of Michigan Law School

Res Gestae

•Professor Basks in Media Limelight •Student Discovers Asbestos In Study Lounge •Barrister Initiation Sends Student to Hospital: Group Contemplates Reforms •For All You Do •Meese Runs Roughshod Over the Presumption of Innocence •Contribute To Family Law Project •More Speech Is Not Always Better •Peace Demonstrators Should Shout Down George Bush •Notices •U-M Honors Vining And J.B. White •Senate Mulls Committees •Soul Dogs Score Two Championship Titles •Law School Linksters Soaked •First Year Battles Mind-Warping Texts •Streep Shines, Sting's Fine In Plenty •Crossword •Point: Send The Squirrels Packing •Counterpoint: Squirrels Are Cute •Law in the Raw

10-22-1985 Correspondence From Blackmun To O'Connor, Harry A. Blackmun

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

Dear Sandra:

My original inclination was to hold this case for No. 84-1279, Delaware v. Van Arsdall. That is still my inclination.

You now have six votes, however, for your proposed per curiam. Would you please note at the end of your opinion:

"JUSTICE BLACKMUN would grant certiorari and give this case plenary consideration."

10-22-1985 Justice O'Connor, Per Curiam, Sandra Day O'Connor

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

In this case, the Delaware Supreme Court reversed respondent William Fensterer's conviction on the grounds that the admission of the opinion testimony of the prosecution's expert witness, who was unable to recall the basis for his opinion, denied respondent his Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him. 493 A. 2d. 959 (1985). We conclude that the Delaware Supreme Court misconstrued the Confrontation Clause as interpreted by the decisions of this Court.

Appeal No. 0129: Buckhorn Oil Company V. Renee J. Houser, Chief Division Of Oil And Gas, Ohio Oil & Gas Board Of Review

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 85-33

10-21-1985 Correspondence From Brennan To O'Connor, William J. Brennan

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

Dear Sandra,

Thank you very much for your prompt reply to my letter. I am happy to join your opinion with your suggested changes. I very much appreciate your consideration.

10-21-1985 Correspondence From Powell To O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

Dear Sandra:

I agree with your Per Curiam.

Bill Brennan's suggestions may be helpful. But my join is not conditioned on your acceptance of them.

10-21-1985 Correspondence From O'Connor To Brennan, Sandra Day O'Connor

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

I think your concerns may be satisfied by the following revisions to the circulating draft, which I am willing to make if they are satisfactory to you:

10-21-1985 Correspondence From White To O'Connor, Byron R. White

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

Dear Sandra,

Please join me.

10-21-1985 Correspondence From O'Connor To Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

You describe Agent Robillard's testimony as involving "an implied prior representation of which the declarant disclaims present knowledge," on the grounds that his qualification as an expert implied that "he had a valid reason for reaching that conclusion at the time of his investigation." But the question reserved in Green involved an express prior representation specifically introduced by
the prosecution as substantive evidence. I see nothing in our cases that would justify embarking on the difficult and questionable enterprise of deciding when there has been an implied representation. In any event, in this case, Agent Robillard openly admitted at voir …

10-20-1985 Justice Correspondence, Unknown

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

As the Court has granted cert on two Confrontation Clause cases, I think this case should be held. New Mexico v. Earnest, No. 85-162 (Oct. 18 Conference), which raises the question whether the Clause precluded admitting a hearsay confession of a codefendant without first considering the statement's reliability, will discuss issues of reliability and will reinterpret Ohio v. Roberts, 448 u.s. 56 (1980) in ways that are certain to be relevant to this case. Delaware v. Van Arsdall, No. 84-1279, raises the question of whether barring the defendant from cross-examining a witness about a possible deal with the prosecutors in …

10-18-1985 Correspondence From Stevens To O'Connor, John Paul Stevens

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

In his concurring opinion in California v. Green, the Chief Justice emphasized "the importance of allowing the states to experiment and innovate, especially in the area of criminal justice." 399 U.S. at 171. Because I believe that comment is applicable to the Delaware court's consideration of the question that is functionally equivalent to the
question left open in Green (and discussed in footnote 18 on page 169), I adhere to my vote to deny cert.

10-18-1985 Correspondence From Brennan To O'Connor, William J. Brennan

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

At conference I vote to hold this case for Delaware v. Van Arsdall, No. 84-1279. Although I still prefer that disposition, I wonder if you would consider making some changes in your per curiam so that I could join it. My suggestions are the following:

Newsletter - 1985-10-17, E. De La Garza

Kika de la Garza Congressional Papers - Newsletters

No abstract provided.

10-17-1985 Justice O'Connor, Per Curiam, Sandra Day O'Connor

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

In this case, the Delaware Supreme Court reversed respondent William Fensterer's conviction on the grounds that admission of the opinion testimony of the prosecution's expert witness, who was unable to recall the basis for his opinion, denied respondent his Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him. 493 A. 2d. 959 (1985). We conclude that the Delaware Supreme Court misconstrued the Confrontation Clause as interpreted by the decisions of this Court.

10-17-1985 Correspondence From Rehnquist To O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist

Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15 (1985)

Dear Sandra,

Please join me in your Per Curiam.

Waste To Energy Projects: Economic Considerations For Electric Utilities And Ratepayers, Assembly Committee On Utilities And Commerce

California Assembly

No abstract provided.

Vol. 34, No. 6, October 16, 1985, University Of Michigan Law School

Res Gestae

•Other Law Reviews' Policies Different •Pendleton Sparks Law Student Outrage •Rex Lee Describes Solicitor General's Office •Respect Speech •Evangelist Pat Robertson Seeks A New Role in Party Politics •Organizations' Unique Role Is Worth More Than a Few Drinks •Henneman Attack on Political Mothers Misogynistic •Politicians' Wives Should Lobby •Figures Don't Lie, But Liars Figure •Don't Drink Up Money •Essay on MADD Typical RG Sexism •Law School Senate Looks At Vending Machine Flaws •Notices •Angst Of God: Jane's Fear Of Flying •Crossword •Law in the Raw

Do "Navigable Waters" Include Wetlands?, Robert H. Abrams

Journal Publications

No abstract provided.

A Report Of The Sandia Pueblo East Boundary On Sandia Mountain, Milford T. Keene

Sandia Pueblo Mountain Claim

"'The purpose of this report is to review and address past surveys of the Pueblo grant boundaries, focusing on the east boundary. Specifically, the report considers these two questions: what did the Deputy Surveyor survey, and is the east boundary survey a result of private oral instruction given to the surveyor and not preserved in the documents? Since those who believe that the boundary should have been along ""the Main Ridge of Sandia Mountain,"" the problem is to decide, if possible, where those translations, interpretations, instructions, and surveys went astray and for what apparent reasons. Study of documents on the …

The Opinion Volume 26 Number 3 – October 9, 1985, The Opinion

The Opinion Newspaper (all issues)

The Opinion newspaper issue dated October 9, 1985

Informational Hearing On Computers And Warranty Protection For Consumers, California State Assembly

California Assembly

No abstract provided.

Vol. 34, No. 5, October 9, 1985, University Of Michigan Law School

Res Gestae

•Ehrlichman Urges Help for Convicts •Res Gestae Roving Reporter Gets Pub Reactions •Senate Passes Office Space Resolution •Do Not Hide Behind Canons to Avoid Social Responsibility •ELS Blasts RG For Story Inaccuracies •Pernick Wants New Transcript Policy •Social Committee Will Begin Carding •Political Mothers Threaten Freedoms •Basement Groups Profit at Partygoers' Expense •Notices •Prohibition Of Alcohol Advertisements Considered •Law School Fellowships Awarded To Alternative Disciplines •Yuppies Are Quickly Losing Favor •Are You A Law Student? •Crossword •Fashion Plate Wendlandt Gives Tips •Law in the Raw

Innovative Transfer And Exchange Plans, Glenn E. Porzak

Colorado Water Issues and Options: The 90's and Beyond: Toward Maximum Beneficial Use of Colorado's Water Resources (October 8)

36 pages (includes maps).

Contains footnotes (page 32).