Courts Commons^™

The Honorable Robert R. Merhige, Jr.: A Series On His Life And Career, Stephen N. Scaife

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Underdeveloped And Over-Sentenced: Why Eighteen- To Twenty-Year-Olds Should Be Exempt From Life Without Parole, Emily Powell

University of Richmond Law Review

Sentencing eighteen- to twenty-year-olds to life without parole should be considered cruel and unusual because it is disproportionate to this class of offenders’ culpability.

Taft, Frankfurter, And The First Presidential For-Cause Removal, Aditya Bamzai

University of Richmond Law Review

In the fall of 1912—while one of the most consequential presidential campaigns in United States history raged around them— William Howard Taft, Felix Frankfurter, and a handful of officials within the federal government initiated a process to remove two members of the Board of General Appraisers (“Board”) for inefficiency, neglect of duty, and malfeasance in office. The process culminated in President Taft’s for-cause dismissal of the two members, Thaddeus Sharretts and Roy Chamberlain, on the very last day that he served as President, after he received a report recommending their firing from a “committee of inquiry” that included Frankfurter.

Enforcing Statutory Maximums: How Federal Supervised Release Violates The Sixth Amendment Rights Defined In Apprendi V. New Jersey, Danny Zemel

University of Richmond Law Review

The Sixth Amendment commands that “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” Trial by a jury of one’s peers is a fundamental American legal right, existing in the earliest colonies before being codified in both Article III of the Constitution and the Sixth Amendment. The jury trial right derives from “the mass of the people,” ensuring that “no man can be condemned of life, or limb, or property, or reputation, without the concurrence of the …

Personal Reflections On The Honorable Robert R. Merhige, Jr.: A Judge, Mentor, And Friend, Mary Kelly Tate

University of Richmond Law Review

Twenty-six years—half my lifetime—have passed since I joined Judge Merhige’s court family as his law clerk. I attempt here to sketch my personal impressions, distilling what to me was most remarkable about Robert R. Merhige, Jr. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this dynamic man turned legendary judge—a man I revered from the moment I met him—is more vivid to me now than he was to my younger self.

The Honorable Robert R. Merhige, Jr.: A Judge Ahead Of His Time, Wayne A. Logan

University of Richmond Law Review

When one thinks about it, it is really quite incredible: a Brooklyn-born son of Lebanese and Irish immigrants with a distinct New York accent, standing well under six feet tall, attends a small North Carolina college on a basketball scholarship; serves with distinction in a bombing squadron in World War II; graduates from the University of Richmond School of Law (paying his way by serving as a night librarian); excels at the practice of law in a city (Richmond) not renowned for its receptivity to Yankees; wins election as president of the city’s Bar; and upon being appointed to the …

The Conscience Of Virginia: Judge Robert R. Merhige, Jr., And The Politics Of School Desegregation, Robert A. Pratt

University of Richmond Law Review

The United States Supreme Court’s 1954 landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education declared that segregation in public education violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. For the millions of African Americans who had endured decades of separate and unequal schooling, this decision was a resounding reaffirmation of the nation’s commitment to equal justice under the law. But those who expected segregated schools to end overnight were in for a rude awakening. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (“NAACP”), which had led the legal assault against segregation since its founding in 1909, was encouraged …

Judge Merhige's Environmental Decisions: Expert Handling Of Groundbreaking Environmental Rulings And Complex Federal Jurisdictional Questions, Jim Vines

University of Richmond Law Review

It is a special privilege for me to contribute to this edition of the University of Richmond Law Review honoring Judge Robert R. Merhige, Jr. Here, I seek to highlight his contributions to United States environmental law. In 1988 and 1989, I was one of two recent law school graduates who clerked for Judge Merhige (“please call me by my first name; it’s ‘Judge’”). The Judge was a larger than life figure. As a federal trial judge, historically important and intellectually challenging cases seemed to find their way into his court in a volume not matched in many other federal …

Due Process And The Right To Legal Counsel For Unaccompanied Minors, Marielos G. Ramos

Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects

Unaccompanied minors arriving to the United States fleeing violence and seeking protection are apprehended, detained in facilities, and placed in removal proceedings in accordance with U.S. immigration laws. Like adults, these children have to appear in immigration court to fight deportation and must apply for any form of legal relief for which they may be eligible. However, removal proceedings work as a civil and not a criminal process, and immigration laws have established that while noncitizens have the right to an attorney, they are not entitled to legal counsel at the government’s expense. This thesis examines how the denial of …

A Philosophical Defense Of Judicial Minimalism, Cory A. Evans

Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects

This dissertation analyzes, criticizes and ultimately defends judicial minimalism, a contemporary theory of judging that has come to the forefront of American jurisprudence in the early part of the 21st Century. In this dissertation I offer the first formal definition of judicial minimalism, apply that definition to case law and the literature, refute many objections to judicial minimalism including objections based on tough case counterexamples, offer a new version of the argument of epistemic humility and offer a new argument in support of judicial minimalism from the perspective of law and economics.

Potential Jurors’ Perceptions Of Polygraphs In Court, Jacob Schiess

Boise State University Theses and Dissertations

The polygraph occupies a contentious place in the justice system. The instrument detects various physical responses and records these results, and the examiner interprets the readings and makes a determination on whether the test subject was truthful or deceptive. Polygraphs are, in some jurisdictions, a part of the court process and in others are forbidden. On the whole, there is less research on the polygraph and their permissibility in the legal process compared to other types of evidence. There is even less research on the opinions of jurors, especially compared to surveys of criminal justice professionals. That which is present …

Prosecutorial Summation: Where Is The Line Between "Personal Opinion" And Proper Argument?, James W. Gunson

Maine Law Review

Prosecutorial forensic misconduct has become front page news in Maine. Since April of 1993, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, has reversed convictions in three highly publicized cases based on remarks made by the prosecutor. In State v. Steen, the prosecutor asked the defendant to give his opinion concerning the veracity of other witnesses and suggested in closing argument that the favorable testimony given by the defense's expert witness resulted from the fee he had received. The Law Court vacated the gross sexual assault conviction, finding that the prosecutor's questions and closing argument “clearly suggested” to …

The Use Of American Precedents In Canadian Courts, Gerard V. La Forest

Maine Law Review

In 1849, the Supreme Court of New Brunswick faced the issue of whether there was a public right to float logs on navigable streams. Not surprisingly, no general right was found in the English common law as large scale floating of lumber down rivers did not exist in England. “Yet in a young country like Canada, the right to float logs and timber was an economic necessity in many areas and some device had to be found to make the activity legal.” To find that legal device, the New Brunswick court turned to the United States, specifically to Maine, and …

Litigation Academy Helps Lawyers Hone Skills 4-30-2018, Katie Mulvaney, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Brief For Douglas Laycock, Michael W. Mcconnell, Thomas C. Berg, Carl H. Esbeck, Richard W. Garnett, And Robert F. Cochran, Jr., As Amici Curiae In Support Of Defendant-Appellee Urging Affirmance, Todd R. Geremia, Victoria Dorfman, Mark R. Kubisch, Daniel D. Benson, Richard W. Garnett

Court Briefs

No. 17-3086
Rev. Dr. William Lee v. Sixth Mount Zion Baptist Church of Pittsburgh

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
No. 2:15-cv-01599-NBF

From the Introduction

In Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC, 565 U.S. 171, 190 (2012), the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed that there is a "ministerial exception" grounded in the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment. This exception forbids the government from "interfer[ing] with the internal governance of the church" and "depriving the church of control over the selection of those who will personify its beliefs." Id. at …

One Of Five: Reflections On Jim Jones' Jurisprudential Impact In His Twelve Years On The Idaho Supreme Court, Hillary Smith

Idaho Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Competency Model For Judges, Talip Aydin

SJD Dissertations

Throughout most modern and contemporary legal scholarship there appears an unbridgeable division between two dominant approaches to judicial decision making. Put succinctly, legal scholars argue that there exist either objective, foundational, ultimate groundings for legal theory and decisions or legal theory and practice inevitably follow a path to relativism and skepticism.

This dissertation argues for a theory of evaluation grounded in the Pragmatic, practical ontology and epistemology. Grounding the theory in this fashion avoids the philosophical views of extreme objectivism and extreme subjectivism. In contrast to these conventional stances, which are rooted in philosophical dualism, the view argued for in …

Epistemic Peerhood In The Law, R. George Wright

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

We thus have, at this point, a preliminary sense of the importance of some possible choices in deciding whose voices and participation should be taken seriously, as that of our epistemic peers, in deciding legal questions. This Article addresses these preliminary understandings in several legal contexts. We can do so most profitably on the basis of a better, fuller, and more specific understanding of the crucial idea of epistemic peerhood. It is thus the idea of epistemic peerhood itself that this Article addresses immediately below.

On Appeal: Courts, Lawyering, And Judging, Richard L. O'Meara

Maine Law Review

If one were to ask the members of the Maine legal community to define the term “judicial temperament,” many would answer the question simply by referring to Frank Coffin. Judge Coffin's newest book, On Appeal: Courts, Lawyering, and Judging, illustrates why the Judge has earned such overwhelming respect. This highly personal work permits readers a glimpse “behind the scenes” at the judicial life of a man who has forged a highly successful career of public service marked by sensitive, fair, and well-reasoned decision-making and by good-humored, collegial relationships with all of his colleagues in the legal community and beyond.

On Appeal: Courts, Lawyering, And Judging, John P. Frank

Maine Law Review

Judge Coffin, a former Chief Justice of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, a former United States Congressman, a former Executive Department administrator, is -- despite those “formers” -- presently a very bright and engaging writer. This compact volume has worthwhile things to say on every aspect of appeals, briefing, argument, deciding the cases, and getting out the opinions. It crisply touches all the appeals phases in which we practitioners are interested.

Honorable John D. Clifford, Jr. A Memoir By His Three Law Clerks, Frank M. Coffin, L. Damon Scales Jr., Richard E. Poulos

Maine Law Review

The domain over which United States District Judge John D. Clifford, Jr. presided from 1947 until his death in 1956 was very different from what it is today. Anyone could walk into the federal courthouse in Portland. Security guards were unknown, and lawyers, litigants, and passers-by were free to come and go. A leisurely air pervaded all the court offices. There was no hurry. This was an era when there were only two lawyers in the United States Attorney's office: the United States Attorney and his one assistant.

Sidney W. Wernick: In Memoriam, Edward S. Godfrey

Maine Law Review

A common sentiment has it that we should bear the death of our elders with a kind of sensible equanimity. The idea seems to be that the old folks have had their turn, served out their usefulness, and, by their departure, have beneficently made more room for the rest of us. Or, more charitably, in a culture that still resonates now and then to Biblical thought, perhaps we are moved to that common sentiment by the mournful cadence of the Ninetieth Psalm, which warns us of the “labour and sorrow” attending survival of the “strong” beyond three score and ten. …

Basic Trial Advocacy, Michael W. Mullane

Maine Law Review

Mary Crates taught me to “begin as you mean to go on.” Peter Murray's book is a good place to begin for those embarking on a life of trial advocacy. For those of us whose beginnings are distant and often painful memories, it is an excellent reminder of where we meant to go. Trial advocacy is an infinitely complex task. This simple fact is both its joy and curse. Teaching trial advocacy is equally difficult. There is no “never” and no “always.” There is a host of commonly accepted maxims, many of which are contradictory on their face and all …

A Measure Of Our Justice System: A Look At Maine's Indigent Criminal Defense Delivery System, Ronald W. Schneider Jr.

Maine Law Review

This Comment will examine briefly the history of the right to counsel and the accompanying right to the effective assistance of counsel in this country. At the time the Sixth Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights, the United States rejected the English practice of denying the right to counsel to those accused of felonies while granting the right to those charged with misdemeanors. People in the United States have enjoyed the right to counsel in all criminal cases, felonies and misdemeanors, since 1791. Yet in a very real and dangerous sense, the courts have reversed the course of …

Native American Tribal Appellate Courts: Underestimated And Overlooked, Gregory D. Smith

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Wither Oral Argument? The American Academy Of Appellate Lawyers Says Let’S Resurrect It!, James C. Martin, Susan M. Freeman

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Slumping: The Eighth Circuit’S Supreme Court Batting Average In Federal-Sentencing Cases, Mark W. Bennett

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Trust In The Jury System As A Predictor Of Juror/Jury Decisions, Kimberly S. Dellapaolera, Bailey A. Barnes, Brian H. Bornstein

UCARE: Research Products

To determine whether jurors’ attitudes are correlated with their verdicts and judgments at trial, the present experiments examined the relationship between individuals’ trust in the jury system, other legal attitudes, and their verdict judgments, at both the individual (juror) and group (jury) level. We used a binary logistic regression model to examine the factors—jury instructions and individual difference measures—that contribute to a juror’s verdict. The results indicate that jurors with higher PJAQ and JUST scores had a higher likelihood of voting guilty on a homicide trial involving a mercy killing. It was also found that the majority of juries in …

Can A Court Change The Law By Saying Nothing?, Paul Gugliuzza, Mark A. Lemley

Faculty Scholarship

Can an appellate court alter substantive law without writing an opinion? We attempt to answer that question by conducting a novel empirical investigation into how the Federal Circuit has implemented the Supreme Court’s 2014 ruling in Alice v. CLS Bank, the most recent in a series of Supreme Court decisions strengthening patent law’s patentable subject matter requirement. Our dataset includes each one of the Federal Circuit’s more than 100 decisions on patentable subject matter in the three years since Alice, including affirmances issued without an opinion under Federal Circuit Rule 36.

Including those no-opinion affirmances, the Federal Circuit has found …

Procedural Retrenchment And The States, Zachary D. Clopton

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Although not always headline grabbing, the Roberts Court has been highly interested in civil procedure. According to critics, the Court has undercut access to justice and private enforcement through its decisions on pleading, class actions, summary judgment, arbitration, standing, personal jurisdiction, and international law.

While I have much sympathy for the Court's critics, the current discourse too often ignores the states. Rather than bemoaning the Roberts Court's decisions to limit court access-and despairing further developments in the age of Trump-we instead might productively focus on the options open to state courts and public enforcement. Many of the aforementioned decisions are …