Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Judicial Deference (2)
- Bench Trials (1)
- Brady Doctrine (1)
- Criminal Punishment (1)
- Criminal investigation -- United States -- Methodology (1)
-
- Criminal procedure (1)
- Disparate Impact Discrimination (1)
- Drug courts (1)
- Etc. (1)
- European Court of Human Rights (1)
- Evidence (Law) -- United States (1)
- Florida v. Jardines (Supreme Court case) (1)
- Four-Fifths Rule (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Freedom of Expression (1)
- Freedom of speech -- European Union countries (1)
- Judicial Review (1)
- Jury Trial (1)
- Jury Trial Right (1)
- Juvenile Drug Court (1)
- Juvenile delinquents (1)
- Kentucky v. King (Supreme Court case) (1)
- Knock & talk (Police methods) (1)
- Laws (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Legislative Fact-Finding (1)
- Legislative Science (1)
- Lex talionis (1)
- Midwest Juvenile Drug Court (1)
- Plain View (1)
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
"Knock And Talk" And The Fourth Amendment, Craig M. Bradley
"Knock And Talk" And The Fourth Amendment, Craig M. Bradley
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Retribution's Role, John Bronsteen
Retribution's Role, John Bronsteen
Indiana Law Journal
Two main types of principle, retributive and consequentialist, have long been identified as the main approaches to justifying criminal punishment. Retributivists deem punishment justified by the wrongdoing of the offender, whereas utilitarians deem it justified by its good consequences such as deterring future crime. Over the past fifty years, each has spent decades as the dominant theory, and many hybrid theories have also been advanced. But few, if any, of the hybrid approaches have valued heavily both retributive and consequentialist considerations while locating the particular justificatory role each category plays. This Article points in that direction by reframing the central …
The European Court Of Human Rights And The Freedom Of Expression, Jean-François Flauss
The European Court Of Human Rights And The Freedom Of Expression, Jean-François Flauss
Indiana Law Journal
Symposium: An Ocean Apart? Freedom of Expression in Europe and the United States. This Article was originally written in French and delivered as a conference paper at a symposium held by the Center for American Law of the University of Paris II (Panthèon-Assas) on January 18-19, 2008.
Toward A Coherent Test For Disparate Impact Discrimination, Jennifer L. Peresie
Toward A Coherent Test For Disparate Impact Discrimination, Jennifer L. Peresie
Indiana Law Journal
Statistics are generally plaintiffs' primary evidence in establishing a prima facie case of disparate impact discrimination. Thus, the use, or misuse, of statistics dictates case outcomes. Lacking a coherent test for disparate impact, courts choose between the two prevailing tests, statistical significance and the four-fifths rule, in deciding cases, and these tests frequently produce opposite results. Litigants thus face considerable uncertainty and the risk that a judge's preferred outcome will dictate which test is applied. This Article recognizes that the two tests perform complementary functions that both play a useful role in determining whether liability should be imposed. statistical significance …
Revisiting Prosecutorial Disclosure, Alafair S. Burke
Revisiting Prosecutorial Disclosure, Alafair S. Burke
Indiana Law Journal
After the exoneration of more than 200 people based on post-conviction DNA evidence, a growing movement against wrongful convictions has called increased attention to the prosecutorial suppression of material exculpatory evidence. Commentators frequently study prosecutorial failures to disclose as a form of intentional misconduct, coloring both the description of the problem and the recommended solutions. This Article, in contrast, explores how even ethical prosecutors might fail to disclose exculpatory evidence because off laws in the Brady doctrine itself-specifically, the Court's limitation of the doctrine to "material" exculpatory evidence. The materiality standard amplifies cognitive biases that distort even an ethical prosecutor's …
The Lost Meaning Of The Jury Trial Right, Laura I. Appleman
The Lost Meaning Of The Jury Trial Right, Laura I. Appleman
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Midwestern Juvenile Drug Courts: Analysis & Recommendations, Nicole A. Kozdron
Midwestern Juvenile Drug Courts: Analysis & Recommendations, Nicole A. Kozdron
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Rethinking Judicial Deference To Legislation Fact-Finding, Caitlin E. Borgmann
Rethinking Judicial Deference To Legislation Fact-Finding, Caitlin E. Borgmann
Indiana Law Journal
It is traditionally assumed that the role of ascertaining and evaluating the social facts underlying a statute belongs to the legislatures. The courts in turn are tasked with deciding the law and must defer to legislative fact-finding on relevant issues of social fact. This simplistic formula, however, does not accurately describe the courts' confused approach to legislative fact-finding. Although the courts often speak in terms of deference, they follow no consistent or predictable pattern in deciding whether to defer in a given case. Moreover, blanket judicial deference to legislative fact-finding would not be a wise general rule. Because social fact-finding …
Scientific Avoidance: Toward More Principled Judicial Review Of Legislative Science, Emily H. Meazell
Scientific Avoidance: Toward More Principled Judicial Review Of Legislative Science, Emily H. Meazell
Indiana Law Journal
Courts increasingly confront legislative enactments made in light of scientific uncertainty. Even so, the degree of deference appropriate to this type of judicial review is a moving target, seemingly determined on an ad hoc, unprincipled basis. On one hand, the decision of how to legislate in light of scientific uncertainty is quintessentially one of policy, suggesting that the highest degree of deference is appropriate. But certain classes of cases, and certain types of scientific questions, seem singularly inappropriate for extreme judicial deference. While significant scholarly attention has focused on the comparative institutional competence of courts and legislatures with respect to …