Law Commons^™

Book Review Of History Of The Supreme Court Of The United States, Volume Ii, Foundations Of Power: John Marshall, 1801-1815, William F. Swindler

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Right To Bail In United States Extradition Proceedings, Carl A. Valenstein

Michigan Journal of International Law

This note examines the judicial rationale for denying bail in extradition proceedings except in special circumstances. The author maintains that the courts apply the special circumstances rule inconsistently. Moreover, a better balance should be struck between the interests of the accused and the interests of the United States Government. This can be accomplished by granting the accused in an extradition proceeding the same right to bail before a final order granting extradition as exists under the federal bail statute.

Individual Rights In The Work Place: The Burger Court And Labor Law, Theodore J. St. Antoine

Book Chapters

The Supreme Court, like other institutions, must play the part that the times demand, often with small regard for the personal predilections of its membership. The Warren Court and the Burger Court, in their respective contributions to the law of union-employer-employee relations, almost reversed the roles they might have been expected to assume. The major accomplishment of the Court in the labor area during the Warren era was a fundamental restructuring of intergovernmental relationships, while the Court's overriding concern throughout the Burger decade of the 1970s and beyond has been the defining of individual rights in the work place.

The Warren Court (Was It Really So Defense-Minded?), The Burger Court (Is It Really So Prosecution-Oriented?), And Police Investigatory Practices, Yale Kamisar

Book Chapters

In one sense the Warren Court's "revolution" in American criminal procedure may be said to. have been launched by the 1956 case of Griffin v. Illinois (establishing an indigent criminal defendant's right to a free transcript on appeal, at least under certain circumstances) and to have been significantly advanced by two 1963 cases: Gideon v. Wainwright (entitling an indigent defendant to free counsel, at least in serious criminal cases) and Douglas v. California (requiring a state to provide an indigent with counsel on his first appeal from a criminal conviction). But these were not the cases that plunged the Warren …

Criminal Procedure, The Burger Court, And The Legacy Of The Warren Court, Jerold H. Israel

Book Chapters

Richard Nixon's criticism of the Warren Court during the 1968 presidential campaign centered largely on the Court's handling of cases involving criminal rights. According to candidate Nixon, the Court had gone much too far. It had twisted the Constitution to serve its own purposes, created a maze of legal technicalities that worked only to frustrate legitimate law enforcement efforts, and so weakened "the peace forces as against the criminal forces in this country" as to be largely responsible for the sharp rise in crime that had occurred in the sixties. What had to be done, continued Nixon, was to appoint …

Does (Did) (Should) The Exclusionary Rule Rest On A 'Principled Basis' Rather Than An 'Empirical Proposition'?, Yale Kamisar

Articles

[U]ntil the [exclusionary rule] rests on a principled basis rather than an empirical proposition, [the rule] will remain in a state of unstable equilibrium. Mapp v. Ohio, which overruled the then twelve-year-old Wolf case and imposed the fourth amendment exclusionary rule (the Weeks doctrine) on the states as a matter of fourteenth amendment due process, seemed to mark the end of an era. Concurring in Mapp, Justice Douglas recalled that Wolf had evoked "a storm of constitutional controversy which only today finds its end."' But in the two decades since Justice Douglas made this observation, the storm of controversy has …

Warrantless Searches And Seizures In Virginia, Ronald J. Bacigal

Law Faculty Publications

There is a well-recognized lack of consistency and clarity in fourth amendment decisions. At times, each search and seizure case seen is unique and the decisions appear to rest on factual determinations rather than on legal principles. Nonetheless, it is desirable to have some understanding of the basic principles of the fourth amendment, and the way in which these principles affect individual cases.

Retroactivity: A Study In Supreme Court Doctrine As Applied, John Bernard Corr

Faculty Publications

The judicial creation of a new rule of law raises the essential question whether that rule is to be applied retroactively orprospectively only. The consistency of the traditionalm andatoryr etroactivityr ule has given way to a more flexible retroactivity ana sis. The change occurred in 1965 when the Supreme Court in Linkletter v. Walker squarelfaced a rule that, if applied retroactively, would have affected thousands of criminal convictions. The Linkletter doctrine has since defined the contours of federal retroactivity ana sis to include three basic considerations: purpose of the rule in question, reliance by theparties on the rule, and effect …

Is The Supreme Court On The Reagan Team?, Neal Devins

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

State Income Taxation Of Multijurisdictional Corporations, Part Ii: Reflections On Asarco And Woolworth, Walter Hellerstein

Michigan Law Review

The first part of this Article, State Income Taxation of Multijurisdictional Corporations: Reflections on Mobil, Exxon, and H.R. 5076, did not contemplate a sequel. The Supreme Court's decisions last term in two state corporate income tax cases, however, created an irresistible opportunity to write one. The Court's opinions in ASARCO and Woolworth picked up where its opinions in Mobil and Exxon left off. Yet the direction taken by these more recent decisions veers sharply from the course ostensibly set by their predecessors. This Article will consider the Court's latest pronouncements in this area in a continuing if quixotic effort to …

Prosecutorial Vindictiveness In The Criminal Appellate Process: Due Process Protection After United States V. Goodwin, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note reformulates the doctrine of prosecutorial vindictiveness in light of the distinction drawn in Goodwin between pretrial and posttrial charging decisions. Part I recounts the development of the vindictiveness concept, and argues that in extending the doctrine beyond the factual settings which moved the Supreme Court to fashion its original prophylactic rule, the circuit courts have seriously eroded an essential due process safeguard. Part II critically examines the distinction between pretrial and posttrial charging decisions relied upon in Goodwin. Developing the logical corollary of the Goodwin holding, this Part argues that just as the pretrial situation does not …

Affirmative Duty And Constitutional Tort, Michael Wells, Thomas A. Eaton

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Article argues that the Bowers principle is wrong. It examines the issues of doctrine and policy that bear on the affirmative duty question in constitutional tort and contends that affirmative duties may be imposed even though constitutional rights are generally negative in character, as a matter of federal constitutional common law. It ·develops a foundation in doctrine and policy, so far lacking in the opinions, to support these duties and to place proper limits upon them.

Part I identifies issues of tort policy that arise in affirmative duty cases, while Part II addresses the distinctive problems that come up …

Interview Notes Of Government Agents Under The Jencks Act, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Most courts that have considered the issue have concluded that the Jencks Act does not require the government to retain and produce rough interview notes. This Note examines the language and purpose of the Act to determine whether interview notes should be considered Jencks Act statements. Part I examines the policy underlying the Jencks Act and argues that the majority position sanctioning pre-trial destruction of interview notes conflicts with these statutory purposes. Part II discusses the statutory language and argues that the status of the witness as a government agent or a private individual determines the applicable section of the …

A Wishful Thinker's Rehearing In The Hague Case, Frederic L. Kirgis

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

Stone V. Powell And The Effective Assistance Of Counsel, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Part I briefly identifies the considerations underlying the Stone Court's decision to limit habeas corpus review of fourth amendment claims. Part II then argues against applying Stone to the sixth amendment claim. After establishing the analytic difference between the two constitutional claims and examining Stone's "opportunity for full and fair litigation" standard, it concludes that Stone is fully consistent with free review of habeas corpus petitions alleging incompetent handling of fourth amendment questions. Finally, responding to a popular interpretation of Stone, Part II demonstrates that the possibility that ineffectiveness claims may not further the determination of a defendant's …