Law Commons^™

Colorado V. Bertine, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Illinois V. Krull, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Arizona V. Hicks, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Griffin V. Wisconsin, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

The Development Of Entrapment Law, Paul Marcus

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Federal Common Law Of Crime, Robert C. Palmer

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law, Richard A. Williamson

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Use Of Prior Convictions To Impeach Criminal Defendants - Do The Risks Outweigh The Benefits?, James W. Betro

Antioch Law Journal

The use of prior convictions to impeach the credibility of a criminal defendant-witness is generally accepted in most American jurisdictions.'Such evidence is allowed in order to present the jury with the general character of a witness so that they may be better able to decide as to his or her tendency to lie on the witness stand.2 The rationale behind this rule is based on the theory that a witness who has been previously convicted of a crime may be less likely to tell the truth than someone who has never been convicted.3 Unfortunately, when a criminal defendant takes the …

The Entrapment Defense And Procedural Issues: Burden Of Proof, Questions Of Law And Fact, Inconsistent Defenses, Paul Marcus

Faculty Publications

Paul Marcus has produced an extremely thorough article on the intriguing and complex defense of entrapment. After analyzing the subjective and objective approaches to the defense, the author turns to the infrequently addressed question of evidence on predisposition. Included here are the recent ABSCAM cases.

Finally, the author explores the vagaries of inconsistent defenses and, on the whole, provides academics and practitioners with a refreshing and useful guide to some of the most important questions involving entrapment.

Insanity And Related Issues, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Attempting The Impossible: The Emerging Consensus, Ira Robbins

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

Impossible attempts are situations in which an actor fails to consummate a substantive crime because he is mistaken about attendant circumstances. Professor Robbins divides mistakes regarding circumstances into three categories: mistakes of fact, mistakes of law, and mistakes of mixed fact and law. Courts and commentators disagree primarily over the identification and treatment of mixed fact law cases. Professor Robbins surveys each category of mistake. He then examines the objective, subjective, and hybrid approaches to dealing with the mixed fact/law category. The objective approach requires an objective manifestation of the actor's intent before conviction is allowed. The subjective approach permits …

Criminal Law - Discovery - Test For Materiality Of Undisclosed Impeachment Evidence, Robert E. Schwartz

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Should The Insanity Defense Be Abolished - An Introduction To The Debate, Norval Morris, Richard Bonnie, Joel J. Finer

Journal of Law and Health

As the plans for the debate began to unfold I was concerned about the possibility that the subject matter might already be jaded, or in any event no longer would be a "hot topic" for our potential audience. Being quite familiar with the writings of our Advocates and therefore particularly susceptible to the reader-listener rehash syndrome, I was nonetheless hopeful that what had the potential for being old-hat would instead be new and interesting to those members of the audience not professionally committed to intimate familiarity with the subject matter. While I had expected that these issues, aired in the …

Criminal Law, Mark Mcqueen

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Attempting The Impossible: The Emerging Consensus, Ira P. Robbins

Ira P. Robbins