Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Universitas Indonesia (584)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (279)
- University of Michigan Law School (267)
- Seattle University School of Law (253)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (156)
-
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (133)
- UIC School of Law (85)
- BLR (67)
- University of Maine School of Law (57)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (56)
- Pepperdine University (49)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (47)
- William & Mary Law School (41)
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (39)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (37)
- University of Colorado Law School (37)
- University of Richmond (33)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (31)
- University of Georgia School of Law (25)
- American University Washington College of Law (24)
- St. Mary's University (24)
- Georgia State University College of Law (23)
- Roger Williams University (23)
- Columbia Law School (22)
- Fordham Law School (22)
- University of Washington School of Law (22)
- Cornell University Law School (21)
- Georgetown University Law Center (21)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (21)
- Pace University (20)
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional Law (215)
- Sixth Amendment (184)
- Fifth Amendment (156)
- Fourth Amendment (151)
- Criminal procedure (136)
-
- Constitution (131)
- Supreme Court (128)
- Due process (122)
- United States Supreme Court (116)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (109)
- New York (107)
- Evidence (104)
- Constitutional law (101)
- Criminal Procedure (100)
- Federal (100)
- Police (97)
- Right to counsel (93)
- Fourth amendment (86)
- Criminal law (78)
- Confrontation Clause (77)
- Criminal Law (77)
- Testimony (74)
- Privacy (73)
- Defendant (71)
- State (67)
- Miranda v. Arizona (62)
- Due Process (61)
- Search (61)
- Self-incrimination (60)
- Death penalty (59)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan (444)
- Touro Law Review (258)
- Seattle University Law Review (214)
- Michigan Law Review (154)
- "Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI (121)
-
- Articles (101)
- Faculty Scholarship (93)
- UIC Law Review (80)
- Cardozo Law Review (75)
- ExpressO (64)
- Maine Law Review (57)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (52)
- Pepperdine Law Review (48)
- Supreme Court Case Files (48)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (47)
- Publications (37)
- Faculty Articles (34)
- Buffalo Law Review (31)
- Scholarly Works (30)
- Faculty Publications (27)
- Seattle Journal for Social Justice (26)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (24)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (23)
- University of Richmond Law Review (22)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (21)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (20)
- West Virginia Law Review (20)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (19)
- Indonesia Law Review (19)
- Nebraska Journal on Advancing Justice (19)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 2761 - 2790 of 3077
Full-Text Articles in Constitutional Law
Perils Of The Rulemaking Process: The Development, Application, And Unconstitutionality Of Rule 804(B)(3)'S Penal Interest Exception, Peter W. Tague
Perils Of The Rulemaking Process: The Development, Application, And Unconstitutionality Of Rule 804(B)(3)'S Penal Interest Exception, Peter W. Tague
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
As the culmination of a decade of rulemaking, in 1975 Congress enacted the Federal Rules of Evidence, which include in rule 804(b)(3) an exception to the hearsay rule that allows federal courts to admit statements against penal interest. Having reviewed previously unpublished memoranda and nonpublic tape recordings of the deliberations of the Advisory and Standing Committees to the Judicial Conference and the Special Subcommittee on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws of the House Judiciary Committee, Professor Tague explores the development of rule 804(b)(3), one of the more controversial rules that emerged from that rulemaking process. After analyzing rule 804(b)(3) and …
Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1980
Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1980
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
Estelle V. Smith, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Michael M. V. Superior Court Of Sonoma County, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Michael M. V. Superior Court Of Sonoma County, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Double Jeopardy: An Illusory Remedy For Governmental Overreaching At Trial, Mary J. Fahey
Double Jeopardy: An Illusory Remedy For Governmental Overreaching At Trial, Mary J. Fahey
Buffalo Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Three Faces Of Double Jeopardy: Reflections On Government Appeals Of Criminal Sentences, Peter K. Westen
The Three Faces Of Double Jeopardy: Reflections On Government Appeals Of Criminal Sentences, Peter K. Westen
Michigan Law Review
Every now and then a case ·comes along that tests the fundamental premises of a body of law. United States v. DiFrancesco presents such a test to the law of double jeopardy, raising the question whether the government may unilaterally appeal a defendant's criminal sentence for the purpose of increasing the sentence. The question cannot be answered by facile reference to the text of the fifth amendment, because the terms of the double jeopardy clause are not self-defining. Nor can it be settled by reference to history, because the issue has not arisen with any frequency until now.
The Fifth Amendment And The Inference Of Guilt From Silence: Griffin V. California After Fifteen Years, Donald B. Ayer
The Fifth Amendment And The Inference Of Guilt From Silence: Griffin V. California After Fifteen Years, Donald B. Ayer
Michigan Law Review
This Article will begin with an examination of the historic (and present) purposes underlying the fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination, upon which any justification of the no-comment rule must ultimately rest. It will explore the danger that these purposes may be thwarted not only when defendants are actually compelled to be witnesses against themselves, but also when significant burdens are placed on defendants who choose not to testify. In Griffin, the Court reasoned that comment on the defendant's silence amounted to such an impermissible burden. But the Court failed to examine the weight of this burden. This failure makes …
Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1979
Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1979
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
Criminal Procedure–Search And Seizure–Curtilage Includes The Garden, Kathryn Duncan Holt
Criminal Procedure–Search And Seizure–Curtilage Includes The Garden, Kathryn Duncan Holt
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Reforming The Federal Grand Jury And The State Preliminary Hearing To Prevent Conviction Without Adjudication, Peter Arenella
Reforming The Federal Grand Jury And The State Preliminary Hearing To Prevent Conviction Without Adjudication, Peter Arenella
Michigan Law Review
It is this Article's thesis that the substitution of plea-bargaining for the criminal trial as our primary method for determining legal guilt requires a fundamental reassessment of our pretrial screening processes. In a system where the prosecutor's decision to file charges is usually followed by a negotiated guilty plea, we can no longer pretend that the pretrial process does not adjudicate the defendant's guilt. Accordingly, this Article argues that it no longer makes sense to rely primarily on the trial to safeguard essential accusatorial principles when pretrial screening devices like the preliminary hearing and the grand jury perform the only …
Rape Victim Shield Laws And The Sixth Amendment, J. Alexander Tanford, Anthony J. Bocchino
Rape Victim Shield Laws And The Sixth Amendment, J. Alexander Tanford, Anthony J. Bocchino
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
The Speedy Trial Act: Conflict Among The Circuits, Dennis P. Koeppel
The Speedy Trial Act: Conflict Among The Circuits, Dennis P. Koeppel
Buffalo Law Review
No abstract provided.
"Your Papers, Please."—Is An Identification Requirement Constitutional?, John Mark Sullivan
"Your Papers, Please."—Is An Identification Requirement Constitutional?, John Mark Sullivan
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Law - Due Process Clause - Where New Prosecution Is Initiated For Additional Criminal Activity Not Specified In An Original Indictment, Actual Vindictiveness Is The Proper Standard To Determine Whether Such Prosecutorial Conduct Is Constitutionally Permissible, Peter R. Kahana
Villanova Law Review (1956 - )
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Law-Criminal Law-Pretrial Detainees May Be Subjected To Conditions Of Confinement Reasonably Related To Legitimate Government Objectives-Bell V. Wolfish, 99 S. Ct. 1861 (1979).
BYU Law Review
No abstract provided.
Roberts V. United States, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Roberts V. United States, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Payton V. New York, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Payton V. New York, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
United States V. Crews, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
United States V. Crews, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Rawlings V. Kentucky, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Rawlings V. Kentucky, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Adams V. Texas, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Plea Bargaining: Is Contract Law Or Constitutional Law The Governing Principle, Herman Lewis Sloan
Plea Bargaining: Is Contract Law Or Constitutional Law The Governing Principle, Herman Lewis Sloan
North Carolina Central Law Review
No abstract provided.
Fourth Amendment Standing And Expectations Of Privacy: Rakas V. Illinois And New Directions For Some Old Concepts, Richard A. Williamson
Fourth Amendment Standing And Expectations Of Privacy: Rakas V. Illinois And New Directions For Some Old Concepts, Richard A. Williamson
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Jury Tampering - 1978 Style Lawyer's Forum., W. James Kronzer
Jury Tampering - 1978 Style Lawyer's Forum., W. James Kronzer
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract Forthcoming.
Allocation Of Peremptory Challenges Among Multiple Parties., Daniel J. Sheehan Jr., Cynthia C. Hollingsworth
Allocation Of Peremptory Challenges Among Multiple Parties., Daniel J. Sheehan Jr., Cynthia C. Hollingsworth
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract Forthcoming.
The Future Of Confrontation, Peter K. Westen
The Future Of Confrontation, Peter K. Westen
Michigan Law Review
The Supreme Court seems to be setting the stage for a long-awaited examination of the confrontation clause. It has been ten years since the Court endeavored in Dutton v. Evans to reconcile the evidentiary rules of hearsay with the constitutional commands of confrontation. Dutton came at the tail end of a string of confrontation cases that the Court had resolved without apparent difficulty. Not surprisingly, the Court approached Dutton in the evident belief that it could resolve the constitutional problems of hearsay once and for all. Instead, after oral argument in 1969 and a rehearing in 1970, the Court found …
Arizona V. Washington, 434 U.S. 497 (1978)
Arizona V. Washington, 434 U.S. 497 (1978)
Florida State University Law Review
Criminal Law-MISTRIAL DECLARATION-OVER DEFENDANT'S OBJECTION, PROSECUTION MUST DEMONSTRATE HIGH DEGREE OF MANIFEST NECESSITY OR REPROSECUTION WILL BE BARRED
Burdening The Fifth Amendment: Toward A Presumptive Barrier Theory, Mark Berger
Burdening The Fifth Amendment: Toward A Presumptive Barrier Theory, Mark Berger
Faculty Works
Judging how heavily the state may burden the decision to exercise or forego the fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination is a concededly problematic undertaking. Nevertheless, the formulation of a standard is essential to ensure principled decision making. Unfortunately, however, the Supreme Court has thus far avoided the task. The decisions from the Warren era suggest in very broad language that any burden on the exercise of the right to remain silent is forbidden, while more recent rulings have barred only those penalties automatically imposed for assertions of the privilege. Neither extreme, however, represents a satisfactory resolution of the conflicting interests …
Due Process Limitations On Prosecutorial Discretion In Re-Charging Defendants: Pearce To Blackledge To Bordenkircher, Donald C. Smaltz
Due Process Limitations On Prosecutorial Discretion In Re-Charging Defendants: Pearce To Blackledge To Bordenkircher, Donald C. Smaltz
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Exclusionary Rule In Parole Revocation Hearings : Deterring Official Infringement Of Parolees' Fourth Amendment Rights, Billy Glenn Dupree Jr.
The Exclusionary Rule In Parole Revocation Hearings : Deterring Official Infringement Of Parolees' Fourth Amendment Rights, Billy Glenn Dupree Jr.
BYU Law Review
No abstract provided.
Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1978
Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1978
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.