Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Fourth Amendment (10)
- Constitutional Law (8)
- Courts (5)
- Supreme Court of the United States (3)
- Criminal Procedure (2)
-
- Legal History (2)
- Computer Law (1)
- Environmental Law (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Health Law and Policy (1)
- Immigration Law (1)
- Internet Law (1)
- Judges (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Military, War, and Peace (1)
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law (1)
- State and Local Government Law (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 14 of 14
Full-Text Articles in Law
Having It Both Ways: Proof That The U.S. Supreme Court Is "Unfairly" Prosecution-Oriented, Christopher Slobogin
Having It Both Ways: Proof That The U.S. Supreme Court Is "Unfairly" Prosecution-Oriented, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
If the assertions that this essay makes about the Court's "unfair" prosecution-orientation withstand scrutiny," two further conclusions might follow. First, the highest court in the country is so fixated on ensuring that a particular side wins that it is willing with some frequency to sacrifice the most basic attribute of any court worthy of the name-the appearance of fairness. This conclusion is a much more fundamental challenge to the Court's integrity than is the simple acknowledgement that a majority of the Justices are biased in favor of the government. Second, to the extent the Court's unfairness becomes common knowledge, its …
Arizona V. Evans: Adapting The Exculsionary Rule To Advancing Computer Technology, C. Maureen Stinger
Arizona V. Evans: Adapting The Exculsionary Rule To Advancing Computer Technology, C. Maureen Stinger
Richmond Journal of Law & Technology
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution protects people from illegal search and seizure: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. The exclusion of evidence obtained from such an illegal search, known as the exclusionary rule, is purported to sanction unconstitutional police conduct by prohibiting illegally seized evidence from being admitted into court. The …
Self Incrimination And Cryptographic Keys, Greg S. Sergienko
Self Incrimination And Cryptographic Keys, Greg S. Sergienko
Richmond Journal of Law & Technology
The Fifth Amendment commands that no person "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." However, extending current judicial interpretations of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments too far may allow the government easy access even to private documents, making one's diary and other documents accessible and admissible in court against their author. What the Court has taken away, technology has given. Modern cryptography can make it virtually impossible to decipher documents without the cryptographic key, thus making the availability of the contents of those documents depend on the availability of the key. This article examines …
State Constitutional Jurisprudence: Decision Making At The New York Court Of Appeals, Michael Hutter, Vincent Bonventre, Luke Bierman
State Constitutional Jurisprudence: Decision Making At The New York Court Of Appeals, Michael Hutter, Vincent Bonventre, Luke Bierman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Court And The Changing Constitution: A Discussion, Carl Sividorski, James Gardner, Barry Latzer, Peter Galie
The Court And The Changing Constitution: A Discussion, Carl Sividorski, James Gardner, Barry Latzer, Peter Galie
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
To Act Or Not? That Is The Question: Self-Incrimination And The Sole Proprietor, Raymond G. Keenan
To Act Or Not? That Is The Question: Self-Incrimination And The Sole Proprietor, Raymond G. Keenan
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Presumption Of Innocence: Patching The Tattered Cloak After Maryland V. Craig., Ralph H. Kohlmann
The Presumption Of Innocence: Patching The Tattered Cloak After Maryland V. Craig., Ralph H. Kohlmann
St. Mary's Law Journal
Over one hundred years ago, the United States Supreme Court recognized the importance of the presumption of innocence in a criminal justice system which is based on due process. The Court declared the presumption of innocence is “the undoubted law, axiomatic, and elementary, and its enforcements lies at the foundation … of our criminal law.” The Court’s changing view of the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause is the most recent contribution to the reduction in the practical value of the presumption of innocence. In Maryland v. Craig, the Court decided that while face-to-face confrontation forms the core of values furthered in …
The Warren Court And Criminal Justice, Yale Kamisar
The Warren Court And Criminal Justice, Yale Kamisar
Book Chapters
Many commentators have observed that when we speak of "the Warren Court," we mean the Warren Court that lasted from 1962 (when Arthur Goldberg replaced Felix Frankfurter) to 1969 (when Earl Warren retired). But when we speak of the Warren Court's "revolution" in American criminal procedure we mean the Warren Court that lasted from 1961 (when the landmark case of Mapp v. Ohio was decided) to 1966 or 1967. In its final years, the Warren Court was not the same Court that had handed down Mapp or Miranda.