Law Commons^™

Suppressing The Incriminating Statements Of Foreigners, John Quigley

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Forecasting Harm: The Law And Science Of Risk Assessment Among Prisoners, Predators, And Patients, John Monahan

ExpressO

Scientifically valid instruments are being used for the first time to assess an individual’s risk of violence in criminal sentencing and in the civil commitment of mental patients and sexual predators. Risk factors on these instruments pertain to what the person is (e.g., gender), what the person has (e.g., personality disorder), what the person has done (e.g., past violence), and what has been done to the person (e.g., past victimization). In this Article, I argue that in criminal law, with its emphasis on blameworthiness for actions taken, the admissibility of scientifically valid risk factors is properly constrained to those that …

“Which One Of You Did It?” Criminal Liability For “Causing Or Allowing” The Death Of A Child, Lissa Griffin

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Contaminating The Verdict: The Problem Of Juror Misconduct, Bennett L. Gershman

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Australia And The United States: Two Common Criminal Justice Systems Uncommonly At Odds, Paul Marcus, Vicki Waye

Faculty Publications

At first glance the criminal justice systems of Australia and the United States look strikingly similar. With common law roots from England, they both emphasize the adversary system, the roleof the advocate, the presumption of innocence, and an appeals process. Upon closer reflection,however, they appear starkly different. From both Australian and U.S. perspectives, the authorsexplore those differences, examining important features such as the exclusion of evidence, rules regarding interrogation, the entrapment defense, and the open nature of trials. The Article concludes with an analysis of the reasons for those differences, reasons that heavily relate back to the founding of the …

Federal Court Adjudication Of State Prisoner Claims For Post-Conviction Dna Testing: A Bifurcated Approach, Dylan Ruga

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “Undoubtedly, there are innocent people in prison. Moreover, it is probable that the wrongly convicted, if given a chance to conduct DNA testing on evidence used against them at trial, could establish their innocence. […]

Part II of this Comment will examine the reasoning behind recent circuit court decisions concerning prisoners’ rights to post-conviction genetic testing. I will explain that a bifurcated approach is the appropriate paradigm for reviewing these claims and demonstrate why three of the four circuit courts erred in their analyses. This part also will review the Supreme Court decisions cited by the circuit courts and …

United States V. Irving, Jared Spitalnick

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Standards Of Evidence In Administrative Proceedings, William H. Kuenhle

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Uses Of History In Crawford V. Washington, Frank Herrmann

Frank R. Herrmann, S.J.

To a striking degree, both the majority and concurring opinions in Crawford v. Washington are replete with references to Anglo-American historical materials, used to support differing conclusions about the application of the Confrontation Clause to testimonial hearsay. This essay sets out Justice Scalia's and Chief Justice Rehnquist's historical arguments and then employs the standards of legal historians to evaluate whether the two opinions use history in a valid manner. The essay concludes that the "history" in Crawford is not that of an historian, but is a "usable past," as conceived by Cass Sunstein and Stephen Griffin.