Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Arkansas v. Sanders (1)
- Bowers v. Hardwick (1)
- Brown v. United States (1)
- California v. Acevedo (1)
- Carroll v. United States (1)
-
- Chimel v. California (1)
- Doyle v. Ohio (1)
- Geders v. United States (1)
- Griffin v. California (1)
- Harry A. Blackmun (1)
- Jenkins v. Anderson (1)
- Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1)
- Mitchell v. United States (1)
- National League of Cities v. Usery (1)
- New York v. Belton (1)
- People v. Hart (1)
- Portuondo v. Agard (1)
- Reagan v. United States (1)
- Roe v. Wade (1)
- San Antonio v. Garcia (1)
- United States v. Chadwick (1)
- United States v. Ross (1)
- Wyoming v. Houghton (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Right To Confrontation Or Insinuation? The Supreme Court's Holding In Portuondo V. Agard, J. Fielding Douthat Jr.
A Right To Confrontation Or Insinuation? The Supreme Court's Holding In Portuondo V. Agard, J. Fielding Douthat Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
Imagine that you are charged with a crime that you did not commit. Forced to attend your own trial, you choose to testify on your own behalf. The prosecutor conducts his best spin to discredit you, but his attempts are largely unsuccessful. Not only is your story consistent with that of other witnesses, but it is a plausible accounting of the disputed facts. The reason: your story is the truth. Nevertheless, in summation, the prosecutor attacks your credibility. His argument, however, addresses no inconsistencies, no physical evidence, and no concrete reason to cast doubt on your story. Instead, he argues …
Change And Continuity On The Supreme Court: Conversations With Justice Harry A. Blackmun, Philippa Strum
Change And Continuity On The Supreme Court: Conversations With Justice Harry A. Blackmun, Philippa Strum
University of Richmond Law Review
Justice Harry A. Blackmun used to enjoy telling a story about Supreme Court conferences during the Court's 1970 term, his first on the Court. Warren Burger was ChiefJustice; Hugo Black was the most senior Justice. Court protocol, of course, is that the Chief Justice begins the discussion of each case, the most senior Justice speaks second, and the floor goes in turn to each of the other Justices according to descending seniority. Chief Justice Burger would present a case by laying out the issues involved as he saw them and the decision he believed the Court should reach. Then he …
Better-Off Walking: Wyoming V. Houghton Exemplifies What Acevedo Failed To Rectify, Erin Morris Meadows
Better-Off Walking: Wyoming V. Houghton Exemplifies What Acevedo Failed To Rectify, Erin Morris Meadows
University of Richmond Law Review
Over the years the United States Supreme Court attempted to produce bright-line rules governing the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement. However, the Court's numerous, often confusing decisions in the past eight decades served only to blur those lines. With each attempt to fashion rules that would be workable for both law enforcement in application and lower courts in administration, citizens' Fourth Amendment rights were narrowed. Each time the Court attempted to clarify a rule, it expanded police power to conduct virtually limitless warrantless searches, consistently eviscerating personal privacy rights. The result is an exception originally intended to …