Constitutional Law Commons^™

State V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (Schneider), 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 59 (Aug. 12, 2016), Ping Chang

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court held that the district court abused its discretion when overturning a misdemeanor driving under the influence conviction by failing to consider the state’s evidence of the defendant’s guilt.

Mary Lou Cornella V. Churchill County, Et Al., 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 58 (August 12, 2016), Stephanie Glantz

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

No abstract provided.

Fast-Track To Injustice: Rapidly Deporting The Mentally Ill, Aimee L. Mayer-Salins

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Goldstein On Drug Databases 6-27-2016, Sheri Qualters, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Moving Beyond Miranda: Concessions For Confessions, Scott W. Howe

Northwestern University Law Review

The law governing police interrogation provides perverse incentives. For criminal suspects, the law rewards obstruction and concealment. For police officers, it honors deceit and psychological aggression. For the courts and the rest of us, it encourages blindness and rationalization. This Article contends that the law could help foster better behaviors. The law could incentivize criminals to confess without police trickery and oppression. It could motivate police officers involved in obtaining suspect statements to avoid chicanery and duress. And, it could summon courts and the rest of us to speak more truthfully about whether suspect admissions are the product of informed, …

Prosecuting Online Threats After Elonis, Michael Pierce

Northwestern University Law Review

In Elonis v. United States, decided last term, the Supreme Court vacated a conviction for online threats on the ground that the lower court erred in its instructions to the jury regarding mens rea. In doing so, however, the Court declined to articulate which mens rea standard would have sustained a conviction. It is thus currently uncertain which mens rea the government must prove when prosecuting online threats under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c). The Elonis Court discussed three potential mens rea standards; as universal standards for online threats, each leaves something to be desired. Fortunately, federal courts need not …

Trending @ Rwu Law: Dean Yelnosky's Post: What The Tragedy In Orlando Means For Rwu Law 6/17/2016, Michael Yelnosky

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

Castaneda V. State Of Nevada, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 44 (June 16, 2016), Chelsea Finnegan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appellant was convicted of 15 counts of child pornography under NRS 200.730. Appellant contested 14 of the 15 charges, arguing that his possession of 15 images of child pornography constituted only one violation. The Court agreed and determined that prosecuting each image or depiction of child pornography as a separate charge under NRS 200.730 is not what the legislature intended. The statute should not be read to charge each “possession” as one violation. The Court reversed 14 of the charges.

Private Prisons And The New Marketplace For Crime, André Douglas Pond Cummings, Adam Lamparello

Law Faculty Scholarship

A saner and safer prison policy in the United States begins by ending the scourge of the private prison corporation and returning crime and punishment to public function. We continue by radically reimagining our sentencing policies and reducing them significantly for non-violent crimes. We end the War on Drugs, once and for all, and completely reconfigure our drug and prison policy by legalizing and regulating marijuana use and providing health services to addicts of harder drugs and using prison for only violent drug kingpins and cartel bosses. We stop the current criminalization of immigration in its tracks and block the …

“Criminal Records” - A Comparative Approach, Sigmund A. Cohn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Erdos V. United States: Expansion Of Extraterritoriality And Revival Of Exterritoriality, Gary I. Strausberg

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Retroactivity In Criminal Procedure, Alex Stein, Dov Fox

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Jurisdiction Of The Irish Courts In The Protection Of The Constitutional Rights Of A Person Accused Of A Crime., Adrian Berski

Reports

Studying the Irish Constitutional Law, requires the understanding of how the Irish Political System was evolved. Montesquieu's tripartite system, adopted by the Republic of Ireland is the judiciary[1] has a particular place in the Irish Constitution in articles 34 - 37[2].

The main purpose of this essay is to analyse the balance between the jurisdiction of the Irish Courts in the protection of the constitutional rights of a person accused of a crime and the functioning of the criminal justice system in protecting Society`s general interest. The first section presents a brief summary of the courts functions …

Better Not Call Saul: The Impact Of Criminal Attorneys On Their Clients' Sixth Amendment Right To Effective Assistance Of Counsel, Veronica J. Finkelstein

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Analysis Of Austin Lawyers Guild V. Securus Technologies, Inc.: The Constitutional And Ethical Implications Of Using Illegally Recorded Attorney–Client Telephone Conversations As Derivative Evidence, Christina Santos

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

For the justice system to operate effectively, privileged communications between an attorney and his or her client should be afforded the utmost and strictest protections. Intrusion by law enforcement upon these communications severely diminishes the confidence and candor needed in the attorney-client relationship. Although the United States Supreme Court recognizes prosecutorial immunity and generally leaves prosecutorial discipline to state bar authorities, the Court has long held that the attorney-client privilege is needed for attorneys to effectively advocate on behalf of their clients.

Austin Lawyers Guild v. Securus Technologies, Inc., a civil class-action lawsuit, is currently pending before the United …

Prostitution Policy: Legalization, Decriminalization And The Nordic Model, Ane Mathieson, Easton Branam, Anya Noble

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Don’T Risk It; Wait Until She’S Sober, Patrick John White

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Let’S Talk About Sex: A Call For Guardianship Reform In Washington State, Sage Graves

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Living Under The Boot: Militarization And Peaceful Protest, Charlotte Guerra

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Let’S Invest In People, Not Prisons: How Washington State Should Address Its Ex-Offender Unemployment Rate, Sara Taboada

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

His Feminist Facade: The Neoliberal Co-Option Of The Feminist Movement, Anjilee Dodge, Myani Gilbert

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

In Her Words: Recognizing And Preventing Abusive Litigation Against Domestic Violence Survivors, David Ward

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Persistence And Resistance: Women’S Leadership And Ending Gender-Based Violence In Guatemala, Serena Cosgrove, Kristi Lee

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Mahajna V. State, Elyakim Rubinstein, Anat Baron, Salim Joubran

Translated Opinions

The Applicant, the leader of the Northern Faction of the Islamic Movement in Israel, was acquitted by the Magistrates Court of the offense of inciting racism, but was convicted of the offense of inciting violence. The Applicant was accused of the offenses due to a sermon he gave in 2007 to an audience of approximately one thousand people near Jerusalem. The court imposed a sixteen-month sentence upon the Applicant, eight months of which were custodial. Appeals were filed against the judgment by both of the parties. The District Court convicted the Applicant of the offense of inciting racism. The Applicant …

To Call Or Not To Call: Compelling Witnesses To Appear Before Congress, Daniel Curbelo Zeidman

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Criminal Prosecution And Section 1983, Barry C. Scheck

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Procedural Due Process Claims, Erwin Chemerinsky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Under The Needle: Ergonomic Issues With Lethal Injection Protocols, Gabriella Hancock

Human Factors and Applied Psychology Student Conference

The institution of capital punishment represents one of the most contentious issues affecting societies today; and while the practice is only implemented in 58 countries, the controversy affects the world at large as over 60% of the human population lives in nations that condone the death penalty (Hali, 2015). In the United States, people who support capital punishment believe the practice to be an effective crime deterrent for potential criminals and therefore a prospective protective measure for law abiding citizens. Moreover, advocates defend their position by forwarding the argument that executions are ‘humane’; that use of lethal injection ensures that …

Ohio V. Clark , Peter M. Torstensen Jr.

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The heart of the debate over the purpose of the Confrontation Clause is the manner in which confrontation was intended to secure a defendant’s rights—either through procedural fairness or ensuring evidentiary reliability. The eventual direction the Supreme Court takes will depend, in large part, on which of these visions of the Confrontation Clause ultimately prevails. Michigan v. Bryant marked a potential step in the direction of the Ohio v. Roberts vision, and Ohio v. Clark does not appear to have departed from the course set in Bryant. Thus, while Crawford v. Washington marked a sea change in the Court’s confrontation …

State V. Boston, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 20 (March. 31, 2016), Nancy Snow

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

After a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder with the use of a deadly weapon, one count of conspiracy to commit murder, and related crimes. Defendant was sentenced to death of each murder. The district court denied Defendant’s motion to suppress statements he made in two interviews with police after his initial appearance before a magistrate. The Supreme Court reversed, holding (1) the district court did not err in denying Defendant’s motion to suppress, as his Sixth Amendment right to counsel attached at his initial appearance before the magistrate, but Defendant waived his right to …