Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Of “Just Systems” And Lotteries: Thoughts And Reflections On Maples V. Thomas, Ryan K. Melcher
Of “Just Systems” And Lotteries: Thoughts And Reflections On Maples V. Thomas, Ryan K. Melcher
Ryan K Melcher
In 2012, the Supreme Court handed down its seven-to-two ruling in the case of Maples v. Thomas, a sad tale of attorney-ethics disasters and a seemingly broken (assuming it ever worked) Alabama criminal-justice system. Although the Court held that the “extraordinary” facts of the case warranted excusing Maples’s procedural default in his federal habeas corpus petition (namely, his failure to file a petition in time), it did not make entirely clear whether this was a one-time-only deal or a “template” (as dissenting Justice Scalia asserted) for future petitioners seeking relief based on similar falters of their post-conviction-level attorneys. This Article …
Towards A Re-Principled Criminal Law, Sarah Wood, Pablo Sanchez-Ostiz
Towards A Re-Principled Criminal Law, Sarah Wood, Pablo Sanchez-Ostiz
Sarah Wood
ABSTRACT: The perceived tension in current discussion of criminal law among efficiency, security, and constitutional rights should be examined in light of the work of Dworkin and Alexy (among others) in order to develop a model of legal argumentation based on Principles for Criminal Law. I consider the following three principles to be the foundational elements of legal argumentation in criminal law: 1) establishing societal security; 2) ensuring respect for legal norms; and 3) assuring respect for the person and human dignity. The roots of these three fundamental principles of legal argumentation are grafted directly from distinct human characteristics: 1) …