Law Commons^™

The 2002 Supreme Court Decisions: Did They Leave Enough Of Apprendi To Effectively Protect Criminal Defendants?, Charlotte Leclercq

Northern Illinois University Law Review

This comment explores the true impact of the 2000 landmark decision, Apprendi v. New Jersey, in which the United States Supreme Court determined that any fact that increases a criminal defendant's sentence beyond the statutory maximum has to be submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. At the time, the decision appeared to be a triumph for the procedural due process rights of defendants. However the opinion of the majority, as well as those of the concurrence and dissents, left the actual effect of the decision subject to considerable debate among courts and commentators. In 2002 the …

Killing The Non-Willing: Atkins, The Volitionally Incapacitated And The Death Penalty, John H. Blume, Sheri Lynn Johnson

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

Failure To Advise Non-Citizens Of Immigration Consequences Of Criminal Convictions: Should This Be Grounds To Withdraw A Guilty Plea?, John J. Francis

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In this Article, Professor Francis argues that non-citizen criminal defendants should be afforded greater latitude in withdrawing guilty pleas, when those pleas are made without awareness of potential immigration consequences. Moreover, the Article highlights the roles both judges and attorneys should play in ensuring that non-citizens do not enter into such uninformed pleas.

Noting that courts have characterized deportation as a collateral consequence of a criminal conviction, the article argues that deportation, following the passage of the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1996, is unique in its severity and certainty. Many of the same due process considerations which underpin the …

Begged, Borrowed Or Stolen: Whose Art Is It, Anyway - An Alternative Solution Of Fine Art Licensing, Judith Bresler

Articles & Chapters

Part II