Criminal Law Commons^™

Double Jeopardy

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Double Jeopardy

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Equal Protection

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Right To Counsel

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confrontation Clause

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confrontation Clause

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Pattern Of Racketeering Element Of Rico Liability, Committee On Federal Courts Of The New York State Bar Association

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.

The Doctrine Of Inevitable Discovery: A Plea For Reasonable Limitations, Steven P. Grossman

All Faculty Scholarship

In reinstating the Iowa murder conviction of Robert Williams, the Supreme Court accepted explicitly for the first time the doctrine of inevitable discovery. Applied for some time by state and federal courts, the doctrine of inevitable discovery is a means by which evidence obtained illegally can still be admitted against defendants in criminal cases. Unfortunately, the Court chose to adopt the doctrine without any of the safeguards necessary to insure that the deterrent impact of the exclusionary rule would be preserved, and in a form that is subject to and almost invites abuse.

This article warns of the danger to …

Does Plight Make Right: The Battered Woman Syndrome, Expert Testimony And The Law Of Self-Defense, Mira Mihajlovich

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Whatever Happened To The "Right To Know?": The Right Of Access To Government-Controlled Information Since Richmond Newspapers On Those Who Don't, Michael Hayes

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure In The Rehnquist Court: Has The Rehnquisition Begun?, Craig M. Bradley

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Preliminary Screening Of Prosecutorial Access To Death Qualified Juries: A Missing Constitutional Link, F. Thomas Schornhorst

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Citizen's Arrests And The Fourth Amendment--A Fresh Perspective, Howard E. Wallin

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Filling In The Gap Left By Congress: What Is The Statute Of Limitations For Private Rico Claims?, Barbara Black

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In increasing number, victims of business fraud are bringing lawsuits under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Since the statute does not set out a time limit for bringing suit, the courts must determine the appropriate statute of limitations. Malley-Duff & Associates, Inc. v. Crown Life Insurance Co. illustrates the difficulties Congress creates for the courts when it fails to provide a limitations period. RICO makes it illegal to engage in a "pattern of racketeering activity" for certain illegal purposes. A "pattern of racketeering activity" consists of at least two acts of "racketeering activity" within a ten-year period. …

The "Good Faith Exception" Cases: Reasonable Exercises In Futility, Craig M. Bradley

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Death Penalty Cases: Shaping Substantive Criminal Law, David R. Schieferstein

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

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 …

Presuming Lawyers Competent To Protect Fundamental Rights: Is It An Affordable Fiction?, Robert G. Lawson

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This article explores the ramifications of Wainwright v. Sykes, a case decided before the Supreme Court of the United States in 1977. The broad question before the Court in Sykes concerned the extent to which state prisoners should have access to federal court by use of the writ of habeas corpus. The narrow issue before the Court concerned the impact on a prisoner's claim for habeas relief of procedural defaults (such as a failure to object to evidence, a failure to perfect an appeal, etc.) that occur in the state proceeding under attack. In considering these important issues Justice …

Federal Habeas Corpus And Ineffective Representation Of Counsel: The Supreme Court Has Work To Do, Peter W. Tague

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The availability of federal habeas corpus relief for state criminal defendants has always borne a complex relationship to state rules barring defendants from litigating constitutional claims in state court because of procedural defaults in raising those claims. The Warren Court's landmark attempt to resolve this relationship was the 1963 decision in Fay v. Noia, which asserted that a state procedural forfeiture rule could not bar federal habeas review of a constitutional claim unless the defendant had "deliberately bypassed" the procedural opportunity to raise the claim; the Court defined "deliberate bypass" in terms of a defendant's intentional and voluntary relinquishment of …

Florida's Legislative Response To Furman: An Exercise In Futility?, Charles W. Ehrhardt, Harold Levinson

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

The Future Of Capital Punishment In Florida: Analysis And Recommendations, Charles W. Ehrhardt, Phillip A. Hubbart, Harold Levinson, William Mckinley Smiley, Thomas A. Wills

Scholarly Publications

The Supreme Court's decision abolishing the death penalty, at least as it existed in most jurisdictions, hardly represents the final resolution of the controversy over capital punishment. Given substantial public sentiment which apparently favors capital punishment in some form-voiced, for example, in the results of the recent referendum in California-various legislative bodies will face the question of whether capital punishment can and should be legislatively reinstated. In December 1972 the State of Florida became the first jurisdiction to pass judgment on this question. The legislature enacted a bill allowing imposition of the death penalty in certain circumstances. The two articles …

Book Notes, Law Review Staff

Vanderbilt Law Review

Identification & Police Line-ups By William E. Ringle New York: Gould Publications, 1968. Pp. x, 211. $5.00 (Paper)

==========================

Metropolitan Decision Processes: An Analysis of Case Studies By Morris Davis & Marvin G. Weinbaum. Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1969. Pp. xx; 131.

==========================

The Impact of Supreme Court Decisions Edited by Theodore L. Becker. New York: Oxford University Press, 1969. Pp. 213. $2.50 (Paper).

==========================

The Limits of the Criminal Sanction By Herbert L. Packer.Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1968. Pp. xi, 385. $8.95.

Immunity Through Confession?, John A. Spanogle Jr.

Vanderbilt Law Review

Does this advice from Judge Leonard P. Moore sound fanciful? Could it ever profit a criminal to confess his guilt? The advisability of such action may not be as improbable as it sounds. In order to determine whether it is fanciful or not it is necessary to review several cases decided by the United States Supreme Court, which this article will undertake to do.

Direct Appeal To The Supreme Court By The United States In Criminal Cases, Philip B. Kurland, Richard F. Wolfson

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.