Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

Avoiding The Appearance Of Judicial Bias: Allowing A Federal Criminal Defendant To Appeal The Denial Of A Recusal Motion Even After Entering An Unconditional Guilty Plea, Nancy B. Pridgen Apr 2000

Avoiding The Appearance Of Judicial Bias: Allowing A Federal Criminal Defendant To Appeal The Denial Of A Recusal Motion Even After Entering An Unconditional Guilty Plea, Nancy B. Pridgen

Vanderbilt Law Review

One of the most fundamental social interests is that law shall be uniform and impartial. There must be nothing in its action that savors of prejudice or favor or even arbitrary whim or fitfulness. A suspect is charged with a federal crime, obtains legal counsel, and finds out who his judge will be. Because of a prominent rumor circulating in the community that the defendant once had an affair with the judge's wife, the defendant questions the judge's ability to be fair with him. He and his counsel file a timely motion for recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a).' The …


Not Twice For The Same: How The Dual Sovereignty Doctrine Is Used To Circumvent "Non Bis In Idem", Dax E. Lopez Jan 2000

Not Twice For The Same: How The Dual Sovereignty Doctrine Is Used To Circumvent "Non Bis In Idem", Dax E. Lopez

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Today, it is quite possible for a criminal defendant who has violated the laws of several countries with one criminal act to be subject to multiple prosecutions. In situations where two countries share concurrent criminal jurisdiction, it is unclear whether the defendant would be able to rely on some level of double jeopardy protection. International law currently does not obligate a sovereign state to recognize another state's penal judgments, thus allowing states to prosecute a defendant regardless of any legal action that may have been previously taken against the defendant. Several countries, however, have chosen to provide defendants with at …


The Reach Of Icc Jurisdiction Over Non-Signatory Nationals, Jordan J. Paust Jan 2000

The Reach Of Icc Jurisdiction Over Non-Signatory Nationals, Jordan J. Paust

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

A new International Criminal Court (ICC) was created on July 17, 1998 under the Rome Statute adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference on Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court. Under the Statute, the ICC will have jurisdiction over crimes of genocide, certain crimes against humanity, and certain war crimes, leaving the crime of aggression for further definition.

Nonetheless, there are certain preconditions to the exercise of such jurisdictional competence, as noted especially in Articles 12-14 of the Statute. In general, the Court can exercise jurisdiction if a "situation" or case (1) is referred to the Prosecutor …


Filling In Some Pieces: The Supreme Court’S Criminal Law Decisions In The 1998-1999 Term, William E. Hellerstein Jan 2000

Filling In Some Pieces: The Supreme Court’S Criminal Law Decisions In The 1998-1999 Term, William E. Hellerstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Vehicle Searches – The Automobile Exception: The Constitutional Ride From Carroll V. United States To Wyoming V. Houghton, Martin L. O'Connor Jan 2000

Vehicle Searches – The Automobile Exception: The Constitutional Ride From Carroll V. United States To Wyoming V. Houghton, Martin L. O'Connor

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Here Today, Gone Tomorrow - Three Common Mistakes Courts Make When Police Lose Or Destroy Evidence With Apparent Exculpatory, Elizabeth A. Bawden Jan 2000

Here Today, Gone Tomorrow - Three Common Mistakes Courts Make When Police Lose Or Destroy Evidence With Apparent Exculpatory, Elizabeth A. Bawden

Cleveland State Law Review

Part I of this Article examines the first question, what does it mean for evidence to have "apparent exculpatory value?" Part II of this Article answers the second question, when does Youngblood's bad faith requirement apply in failure to preserve evidence cases? Part III then seeks to determine the substance of Youngblood's bad faith requirement and identify the best approach to defining it. Ultimately, this Article argues that there are three common mistakes that courts make when applying Trombetta and Youngblood.


The Grand Jury And Exculpatory Evidence: Should The Prosecutor Be Required To Disclose Exculpatory Evidence To The Grand Jury, Ali Lombardo Jan 2000

The Grand Jury And Exculpatory Evidence: Should The Prosecutor Be Required To Disclose Exculpatory Evidence To The Grand Jury, Ali Lombardo

Cleveland State Law Review

In 1992, the United States Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Williams that the federal courts do not have the supervisory power to require prosecutors to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury. This Note argues that the Williams decision is flawed because it diminishes crucial rights of defendants and because it prevents the grand jury from fulfilling its protective function. In Section II, this Note examines the historical background and purpose of the grand jury in England and America. Section III discusses the Williams decision and the rationale behind both the majority and dissenting opinions. It also discusses …