Criminal Law Commons^™

Habeas Corpus Committee - Bill Texts, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Habeas Corpus Committee

No abstract provided.

Habeas Corpus Committee - Capital Punishment Data, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Habeas Corpus Committee

No abstract provided.

Habeas Corpus Committee - Printed Materials, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Habeas Corpus Committee

No abstract provided.

Florida Star V. B.J.F.: The Rape Of The Right To Privacy, 23 J. Marshall L. Rev. 731 (1990), Barbara Lynn Pedersen

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Stanford V. Kentucky: The Minimum Age For The Maximum Penalty - Death, 23 J. Marshall L. Rev. 453 (1990), Alison R. Faltersack

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered V. United States: Supreme Court Approves Attorney Fee Foreiture, 23 J. Marshall L. Rev. 471 (1990), Stephen M. Kightlinger

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Constraints On Proving "Whodunnit?", John O. Sonsteng

Faculty Scholarship

American system places these constraints on the age old criminal law question: “WHODUNIT?” This article explores these issues.

Fourth Amendment Applicability, John O. Sonsteng

Faculty Scholarship

A large percentage of fourth amendment litigation involves the issues of applicability to place, waiver/consent, and the reasonable expectation of privacy. Not one of these issues, however, has the remotest thing to do with the ultimate substance of the fourth amendment protection itself. They deal exclusively with the threshold question of whether the fourth amendment is even involved. Only if it is, do the actual requirements of the fourth amendment become material. This article examines the applicability of the fourth amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizures with respect to these common issues.

Addressing The Needs Of Attorneys For The Damned, Sean O'Brien

Faculty Works

This article is an introduction to the UMKC Law Review symposium issue dedicated to exploring the topic of capital punishment. UMKC Professor of Law Sean O’Brien shares how the growing importance of capital litigation makes this a timely and appropriate subject for consideration and shares how the university and the Law Review's attention to the death penalty debate contributes to more than just academic discussion.

Waiver Of Constitutional Issues In Criminal Cases: Confusion In The Illinois Supreme Court, 11 N. Ill. U. L. Rev. 55 (1990), Timothy P. O'Neill

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Vindicating The Defendant's Constitutional Right To Testify At A Criminal Trial: The Need For An On-The-Record Waiver, 51 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 809 (1990), Timothy P. O'Neill

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Lockhart V. Nelson: Trial Error, Evidentiary Insufficiency, And Double Jeopardy, Scott E. Schul

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Gideon V. Wainwright Revisited: What Does The Right To Counsel Guarantee Today?, Michael B. Mushlin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In Gideon v. Wainwright, the Supreme Court unanimously held that indigent state felony defendants are constitutionally entitled to the appointment of trial counsel. The opinion aroused wide support, and even enthusiasm, almost from the moment it was announced in 1963. Two and a half decades later this support has not diminished. However, are the words of praise only lip service to the noble idea of the right to counsel? Has Gideon really made a difference? Has its promise of a fair shake for poor criminal defendants been kept, or has Gideon meant only that defendants are provided with the fleeting …

A Proposal To Illinois Legislators: Revise The Illinois Criminal Code To Include Criminal Sanctions Against Prenatal Substance Abusers, 23 J. Marshall L. Rev. 393 (1990), Kathryn Schierl

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Privilege Against Compelled Self-Incrimination, John O. Sonsteng

Faculty Scholarship

This article examines the fifth amendment right against compelled self-incrimination, as compared to principles in confession law. These two areas of law are not the same. In 1966, however, the Supreme Court decision of Miranda v. Arizona announced that many of the principles involved in confession law also implicated the fifth amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination. The popular impact of Miranda has resulted in the equating of confession law with the fifth amendment privilege. This article examines the history of the fifth amendment privilege, its application, and how it can be distinguished from other, related areas of law.

A Plea For Help: Pleading Problems In Section 1983 Municipal Liability Claims, Evan S. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Where To Draw The Guideline: Factoring The Fruits Of Illegal Searches Into Sentencing Guidelines Calculations, Cheryl G. Bader, David S. Douglas

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Note, Maynard V. Cartwright: Channeling Arizona's Use Of The Heinous, Cruel Or Depraved Aggravating Circumstance To Impose The Death Penalty, Terrill Pollman

Scholarly Works

“Death is qualitatively different from other punishments that can be imposed by the state.” Recognition of this disturbing conclusion led to the heightened scrutiny demonstrated in a series of United States Supreme Court rulings beginning with Furman v. Georgia, which set forth the constitutionally acceptable range of discretion that a judge or jury may use in imposing the death penalty. States have attempted to bring their statutes within the Furman v. Georgia range by articulating aggravating circumstances that warrant the imposition of the death penalty. One controversial circumstance that many states employ permits a capital sentence where the offense …

Equality Theory, Marital Rape, And The Promise Of The Fourteenth Amendment, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

During the 1980s a handful of state judges either held or opined in dicta what must be incontrovertible to the feminist community, as well as to most progressive legal advocates and academics: the so-called marital rape exemption, whether statutory or common law in origin, constitutes a denial of a married woman's constitutional right to equal protection under the law. Indeed, a more obvious denial of equal protection is difficult to imagine: the marital rape exemption denies married women protection against violent crime solely on the basis of gender and marital status. What possibly could be less rational than a statute …

A Step Towards Fairness In Capital Litigation: Missouri Resource Center, Sean O'Brien

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

Ex Post Facto Judicial Clarification Of A Vague Aggravating Circumstance In A Capital Punishment Statute, Kenneth S. Gallant

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Due Process Defense In Entrapment Cases, The Journey Back, Paul Marcus

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

More Than "Slightly Retro:" The Rehnquist Court's Rout Of Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction In Teague V. Lane, James S. Liebman

Faculty Scholarship

Someone I know, more a student of contemporary fashion than I, sometimes describes people dressed in uniformly dark clothing as "slightly retro." I am not sure of the allusion, but what I can discern leads me to think that the Supreme Court's nonretroactivity decisions beginning with Teague v. Lane are – puns aside – more than just "slightly retro."

The Court's innovation may be stated as follows: For 160 years, Congress empowered federal judges to order state officials to release or retry individuals held in custody in violation of federal law as those federal judges, and not the state officials, …

"Were There No Appeal": The History Of Review In American Criminal Courts, David Rossman

Faculty Scholarship

The contemporary criminal justice system is guided, in large part, from the top down. A great deal of the force that drives the "terrible engine" of the criminal law is supplied by courts that consider cases on review after a defendant has been convicted.

Form And Function In The Administration Of Justice: The Bill Of Rights And Federal Habeas Corpus, Larry Yackle

Faculty Scholarship

Part I critiques the Report's insistence that accurate fact finding exhausts, or nearly exhausts, the objectives of criminal justice, identifies the fundamental role of the Bill of Rights in the American political order, and situates federal habeas corpus within that framework. Part II traces the Report's historical review of the federal habeas jurisdiction and critiques the Report's too-convenient reliance on selected materials that, on examination, fail to undermine conventional understandings of the writ's development as a postconviction remedy. Part III responds to the Report's complaints regarding current habeas corpus practice and refutes contentions that the habeas jurisdiction overburdens federal dockets …

How Useful Is Civil Rico In The Enforcement Of Criminal Law?, Gerard E. Lynch

Faculty Scholarship

The title of this paper asks what appears to be a simple and important question: Just how much does the availability of extensive private civil remedies for violation of the RICO statute add to the effort to ensure compliance with the norms of criminal law? These remarks address only civil RICO actions by private plaintiffs. The once-rare, but increasingly frequent, civil RICO actions brought by the United States present very different issues. This question is, of course, only a part of any assessment of the value of civil RICO. One may conclude that civil RICO is of little or no …

A Political-Choice Approach To Limiting Prejudicial Evidence, J. Alexander Tanford

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Murray V. United States: The Bell Tolls For The Search Warrant Requirement, Craig M. Bradley

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Toward An Expanded View Of The Due Process Claim In Entrapment Cases, Paul Marcus

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Who’S Afraid Of The Sanction Wolf: Imposing Sanctions On Pro Se Litigants, Donalda Gillies

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.