Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
"Sweet Childish Days": Using Developmental Psychology Research In Evaluating The Admissibility Of Out-Of-Court Statements By Young Children, Lynn Mclain
Maine Law Review
Young children are frequently precluded from testifying at trial on the grounds of incompetency because they cannot answer questions about abstract concepts regarding “truth” and “lies.” In this situation, should the child’s earlier, out-of-court statements disclosing the abuse and identifying the abuser also be inadmissible? The stakes are huge. If young children cannot testify, and their out-of-court statements are precluded, they simply become safe prey, unprotected by the judicial system. The pivotal question becomes, are there procedures that can ensure fairness both to children and to their alleged abusers? This article argues that a child’s testimonial incapacity at trial ought …
Book Review: James Duane, You Have The Right To Remain Innocent: What Police Officers Tell Their Children About The Fifth Amendment, Cecily J. Mullins
Book Review: James Duane, You Have The Right To Remain Innocent: What Police Officers Tell Their Children About The Fifth Amendment, Cecily J. Mullins
ConLawNOW
In this essay, the student author reviews the book You Have the Right to Remain Innocent by James Duane, which emphasizes the inherent risks of speaking to the police, regardless of whether or not you have something to hide.
Holding Supporters Of Terrorism Accountable: The Exercise Of General Jurisdiction Over The Pa And Plo In A Post-Daimler Framework, Mark D. Christopher
Holding Supporters Of Terrorism Accountable: The Exercise Of General Jurisdiction Over The Pa And Plo In A Post-Daimler Framework, Mark D. Christopher
Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law
No abstract provided.
The Law Court's Proper Application Of Miranda In State V. Bragg: A "Matter-Of-Fact Communication" To The Defendant Regarding Evidence Against Him Will Not Typically Constitute "Interrogation", Stephen B. Segal
Maine Law Review
In State v. Bragg, Tammy Bragg was convicted of a Class D crime for operating under the influence (OUI) at the completion of a jury trial, and was ordered to pay a fine of $800 and her license was suspended for ninety days. During her trial, Bragg submitted a motion to suppress statements she made in the police officer’s vehicle and the police station on the grounds that she was not read her Miranda warnings prior to making the statements. The Superior Court denied her motion, however, concluding that Miranda warnings were not necessary in the officer’s vehicle because her …
The Lost Due Process Doctrines, Paul J. Larkin Jr.
The Lost Due Process Doctrines, Paul J. Larkin Jr.
Catholic University Law Review
Due process jurisprudence has long been dominated by discussion of its procedural requirements and substantive limitations. Through the lens of the Constitution’s Due Process Clause, however, the Supreme Court has also considered the geographic reach and substantive exercise of legal authority, the delegation of law making to private parties, the incorporation doctrine, and the issues of fundamental fairness. These doctrines have existed for some time, but the Supreme Court has never explained how they fit into its “procedural vs. substantive” dichotomy. This article examines these Lost Due Process Doctrines and poses the question of whether they should suffer the same …
State V. Lovejoy: Should Pre-Arrest, Pre-Miranda Silence Be Admissible During The State's Case-In-Chief As Substantive Evidence Of Guilt?, Mark A. Rucci
Maine Law Review
Article 1, section 6 of Maine Constitution reads in part that “[t]he accused shall not be compelled to give evidence against himself or herself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, property, or privileges . . . .” Further, the Law Court has held that “the State constitutional protection against self-incrimination is the equivalent of the Fifth Amendment." However, as with most provisions of the Constitution, the protection against self-incrimination is open to interpretation. While the Supreme Court has answered some questions surrounding the Fifth Amendment’s protections, it has left many decisions regarding its scope largely within the purview of the …