Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Universitas Indonesia (871)
- 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 Nebraska - Lincoln (26)
- University of Georgia School of Law (25)
- American University Washington College of Law (24)
- St. Mary's University (24)
- Fordham Law School (23)
- Georgia State University College of Law (23)
- Roger Williams University (23)
- Columbia 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)
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional Law (215)
- Sixth Amendment (184)
- Fifth Amendment (156)
- Fourth Amendment (150)
- 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 (72)
- 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 (731)
- 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)
- Nebraska Journal on Advancing Justice (25)
- 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)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 2491 - 2520 of 3371
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
The Botched Hanging Of William Williams: How Too Much Rope And Minnesota’S Newspapers Brought An End To The Death Penalty In Minnesota, John Bessler
All Faculty Scholarship
This article describes Minnesota's last state-sanctioned execution: that of William Williams, who was hanged in 1906 in the basement of the Ramsey County Jail. Convicted of killing a teenage boy, Williams was tried on murder charges in 1905 and was put to death in February of the following year. Because the county sheriff miscalculated the length of the rope, the hanging was botched, with Williams hitting the floor when the trap door was opened. Three deputies, standing on the scaffold, thereafter seized the rope and forcibly pulled it up until Williams - fourteen and half minutes later - died by …
Entrapment And The Problem Of Deterring Police Misconduct, Dru Stevenson
Entrapment And The Problem Of Deterring Police Misconduct, Dru Stevenson
ExpressO
Many the states currently use a version of the entrapment defense known as the “objective test,” which focuses solely on the extent of police overreaching in the case, and seeks to deter police misconduct by acquitting the defendant. Acquitting defendants as a means of deterring undercover police misconduct, however, is a public policy fraught with problems, and these problems have not been adequately addressed in the literature to date. This article applies the insights of modern deterrence theory to wrongful activity by police in undercover operations. In doing so, three general problems emerge. First, the objective test relies on an …
The Domestic Security Enhancement Act Of 2003: A Glimpse Into A Post-Patriot Act Approach To Combating Domestic Terrorism, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 327 (2004), Timothy Scahill
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Remaining Silent: A Right With Consequences, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 649 (2004), Jeffrey D. Waltuck
Remaining Silent: A Right With Consequences, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 649 (2004), Jeffrey D. Waltuck
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Overcoming Hiddenness: The Role Of Intentions In Fourth Amendment Analysis, Daniel B. Yeager
Overcoming Hiddenness: The Role Of Intentions In Fourth Amendment Analysis, Daniel B. Yeager
Faculty Scholarship
This Article rehearses a response to the problems posed to and by the Supreme Court's attempts to work out the meaning and operation of the word "search." After commencing Part II by meditating on the notion of privacy, I take up its relation to the antecedent suspicion or knowledge that Fourth-Amendment law requires as a justification for all privacy invasions. From there, I look specifically at that uneasy relation in Supreme Court jurisprudence, which has come to privilege privacy over property as a Fourth Amendment value. From there, Part III reviews the sources or bases that can tell us what …
A Look Back On A Half-Century Of Teaching, Writing And Speaking About Criminal Law And Criminal Procedure, Yale Kamisar
A Look Back On A Half-Century Of Teaching, Writing And Speaking About Criminal Law And Criminal Procedure, Yale Kamisar
Articles
When I look back at my academic career, I realize that, as hard as I tried to plan things, various events often overrode my plans.
Adjusting To Crawford: High Court Decision Restores Confrontation Clause Protection, Richard D. Friedman
Adjusting To Crawford: High Court Decision Restores Confrontation Clause Protection, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
In Crawford v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 1354 (2004), the U.S. Supreme Court radically transformed its doctrine governing the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Craitiord is a very positive development, restoring to its central position one of the basic protections of the common law system of criminal justice. But the decision leaves many open questions, and all lawyers involved in the criminal justice process will have to adjust to the new regime that it creates. This article outlines and summarizes the problems with the law as it stood before Crait/brd. It then explains the theoretical …
The Useful, Dangerous Fiction Of Grand Jury Independence, Niki Kuckes
The Useful, Dangerous Fiction Of Grand Jury Independence, Niki Kuckes
Law Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Loose Not The Floodgates, Benjamin J. Cooper
Loose Not The Floodgates, Benjamin J. Cooper
Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice
The article examines the implications of the Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down sodomy laws, arguing that while the ruling was necessary, it raises concerns about the broader regulation of sexual conduct outside marriage. The author contends that such laws, despite rare enforcement, serve societal functions, including protecting marriage and providing moral boundaries that deter harmful behavior, particularly among young people.
The Shag-A-Delic Supreme Court: "Anal Sex," "Mystery," "Destiny," And The "Transcendent" In Lawrence V. Texas, Richard D. Mohr
The Shag-A-Delic Supreme Court: "Anal Sex," "Mystery," "Destiny," And The "Transcendent" In Lawrence V. Texas, Richard D. Mohr
Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice
The article critiques Justice Anthony Kennedy's majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas for its lack of clarity and robust constitutional framework. While the decision overturned Texas's sodomy law, the author argues that Kennedy's reasoning conflated liberty and equality rights, relied on vague language, and failed to establish a clear legal standard, undermining its potential to provide strong protection for LGBTQ+ rights.
Challenging Dissent: The Ontology And Logic Of Lawrence V. Texas, Jami Weinstein, Tobyn Demarco
Challenging Dissent: The Ontology And Logic Of Lawrence V. Texas, Jami Weinstein, Tobyn Demarco
Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice
The article examines the Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which invalidated a Texas antisodomy statute criminalizing homosexual conduct. The Court held that the statute failed rational basis review and rejected the promotion of majoritarian sexual morality as a legitimate state interest. The decision reflects a broader recognition of the fundamental right to make autonomous, private, consensual, adult sexual choices. The analysis critiques Justice Scalia's dissent, arguing that his fears about the end of morals legislation are unfounded and that laws based solely on moral disapproval lack a rational basis.
The Free Speech Coalition & Adult Entertainment: An Inside View Of The Adult Entertainment Industry, Its Leading Advocate & The First Amendment, Clay Calvert, Robert Richards
The Free Speech Coalition & Adult Entertainment: An Inside View Of The Adult Entertainment Industry, Its Leading Advocate & The First Amendment, Clay Calvert, Robert Richards
Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Sattazahn V. Pennsylvania: Double Jeopardy And The Definition Of "Acquittal" In Capital-Sentencing Proceedings, Matthew G. Howells
Sattazahn V. Pennsylvania: Double Jeopardy And The Definition Of "Acquittal" In Capital-Sentencing Proceedings, Matthew G. Howells
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Postscript: Another Look At Patane And Seibert, The 2004 Miranda 'Poisoned Fruit' Cases, Yale Kamisar
Postscript: Another Look At Patane And Seibert, The 2004 Miranda 'Poisoned Fruit' Cases, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Some months after I finished writing an article that, inter alia, discussed the lower court opinions in Patane and Seibert (an article that appears elsewhere in this issue of the Journa),1 the Supreme Court handed down its decisions in those cases.2 In Patane, a 5-4 majority held admissible a Glock pistol located as a result of a failure to comply with Miranda. In Seibert, a 5-4 majority agreed with the state court that a "second confession," one obtained after the police had deliberately used a two-stage interrogation technique designed to undermine the Miranda warnings, was inadmissible. 3 In Patane, Justice …
The Confrontation Clause Re-Rooted And Transformed, Richard D. Friedman
The Confrontation Clause Re-Rooted And Transformed, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
For several centuries, prosecution witnesses in criminal cases have given their testimony under oath, face to face with the accused, and subject to cross-examination at trial. The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the procedure, providing that ‘‘[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witness against him.’’ In recent decades, however, judicial protection of the right has been lax, because the U.S. Supreme Court has tolerated admission of outof- court statements against the accused, without cross-examination, if the statements are deemed ‘‘reliable’’ or ‘‘trustworthy.’’ …
Face To Face': Rediscovering The Right To Confront Prosecution Witnesses, Richard D. Friedman
Face To Face': Rediscovering The Right To Confront Prosecution Witnesses, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of an accused 'to confront the witnesses against him'. The United States Supreme Court has treated this Confrontation Clause as a broad but rather easily rebuttable rule against using hearsay on behalf of a criminal prosecution; with respect to most hearsay, the exclusionary rule is overcome if the court is persuaded that the statement is sufficiently reliable, and the court can reach that conclusion if the statement fits within a 'firmly rooted' hearsay exception. This article argues that this framework should be abandoned. The clause should not be regarded …
Lawrence And Garner: The Love (Or At Least Sexual Attraction) That Finally Dared Speak Its Name, Paris R. Baldacci
Lawrence And Garner: The Love (Or At Least Sexual Attraction) That Finally Dared Speak Its Name, Paris R. Baldacci
Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice
The article examines the legal evolution from *Bowers v. Hardwick* to Lawrence v. Texas, highlighting how the latter marked a pivotal shift in recognizing LGBTQ+ rights by emphasizing personal autonomy and dignity. It underscores the significance of narrative strategies in shaping judicial decisions, particularly in *Lawrence*, where the plaintiffs' personal stories influenced the Court's ruling.
The Crawford Transformation, Richard D. Friedman
The Crawford Transformation, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Crawford v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 1354 (2004), is one of the most dramatic Evidence cases in recent history, radically transforming the doctrine governing the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Crawford is a very positive development, but leaves many open questions - and forces Evidence teachers to rethink how they teach hearsay and confrontation.
Face To Face With The Right Of Confrontation, Richard D. Friedman
Face To Face With The Right Of Confrontation, Richard D. Friedman
Other Publications
This article is an edited excerpt from the amicus curiae brief filed in Crawford v. Washington, heard before the United States Supreme Court on November 10, 2003. Prof. Friedman wrote the brief for the Court.
Guilty Without Charge: Assessing The Due Process Rights Of Unindicted Co-Conspirators, Ira Robbins
Guilty Without Charge: Assessing The Due Process Rights Of Unindicted Co-Conspirators, Ira Robbins
Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals
The grand jury practice of naming individuals as unindicted co-conspirators routinely results in injury to reputations,lost employment opportunities, and a practical inability to run for public office. Yet, because these individuals are not parties to a criminal trial, they have neither the right to present evidence nor the opportunity to clear their names. Thus, Professor Robbins argues that the practice violates the Fifth Amendment guarantee that “[n]o person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law[.]” While prosecutors may offer many justifications to support the practice of naming unindicted co-conspirators, these reasons …
Countermajoritarian Hero Or Zero - Rethinking The Warren Court's Role In The Criminal Procedure Revolution, Corinna Barrett Lain
Countermajoritarian Hero Or Zero - Rethinking The Warren Court's Role In The Criminal Procedure Revolution, Corinna Barrett Lain
Law Faculty Publications
With last fall marking the fiftieth anniversary of Earl Warren's appointment as Chief Justice, enough time has passed to place the criminal procedure revolution in proper historical perspective and rethink the Court's role there as countermajoritarian hero. In the discussion that follows, I aim to do that by examining five of the revolution's most celebrated decisions: Mapp v. Ohio, Gideon v. Wainwright, Miranda v. Arizona, Katz v. United States, and Terry v. Ohio. In none of these cases, I argue, did the Supreme Court act in a manner truly deserving of its countermajoritarian image. To be clear, I do not …
Tribute To Yale Kamisar, Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Tribute To Yale Kamisar, Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Michigan Law Review
When the editors of this issue told me of Professor Yale Kamisar's decision to retire from full-time teaching after a near half century of law faculty service, two thoughts came immediately to mind. First, I thought of the large loss to Michigan students unable to attend his classes and to faculty colleagues at Ann Arbor unable routinely to engage his bright mind. Second, I thought it altogether right for the Michigan Law Review to publish an issue honoring one of the Law School's most prized professors. When invited to write a tribute, I could not resist saying yes.
Publications By Professor Yale Kamisar, Michigan Law Review
Publications By Professor Yale Kamisar, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
A bibliography of publications by Yale Kamisar.
Stories About Miranda, George C. Thomas Iii
Stories About Miranda, George C. Thomas Iii
Michigan Law Review
It is no exaggeration to say that Yale Kamisar was present at the creation of Miranda v. Arizona. To be sure, the seeds of Miranda had been sown in earlier cases, particularly Escobedo v. Illinois, but Escobedo was a Sixth Amendment right to counsel case. Professor Kamisar first saw the potential for extending the theory of Escob edo to the Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. Escob edo theorized that a healthy criminal justice system requires that the accused know their rights and are encouraged to exercise them. The Escobedo Court read history to teach that no system …
Drug-Detection Dogs, Traffic Stops, And The Fourth Amendment, Michael J. Fields
Drug-Detection Dogs, Traffic Stops, And The Fourth Amendment, Michael J. Fields
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Delusions Of Grand Juries, Niki Kuckes
Indianapolis V. Edmond And The Original Understanding Of The Fourth Amendment, Bruce Newman
Indianapolis V. Edmond And The Original Understanding Of The Fourth Amendment, Bruce Newman
ExpressO
In this article I examine to what extent Indianapolis v. Edmond is in keeping with the original understanding of the Fourth Amendment. I conclude that the Founders were much more concerned with searches of real property, often insisting, not only on suspicion, but also a on warrant when searches of real property are involved. Secondly, while the Founders did not consider warrants necessary for searches and seizures off of real property (which for the sake of simplicity I call searches in public areas) the evidence suggests suspicion was required. Indeed, the Fourth Amendment was a direct response to the British …
National Identity Cards: Fourth And Fifth Amendment Issues, Daniel J. Steinbock
National Identity Cards: Fourth And Fifth Amendment Issues, Daniel J. Steinbock
ExpressO
In the past two years there have been serious calls for a national identity system whose centerpiece would be some form of national identity card. Such a system is seen mainly as a tool against terrorists, but also as a useful response to illegal immigration, identity theft, and electoral fraud. Both proponents and opponents have noted the potential constitutional problems of such an identity system, but as yet there has been no published legal analysis of these questions. This article aims to fill that gap by analyzing the Fourth and Fifth Amendment issues in two major features of any likely …
The Self-Incrimination Clause Explained And Its Future Predicted, Ronald J. Allen
The Self-Incrimination Clause Explained And Its Future Predicted, Ronald J. Allen
ExpressO
No abstract provided.
Canadian Fundamental Justice And American Due Process: Two Models For A Guarantee Of Basic Adjudicative Fairness, David M. Siegel
Canadian Fundamental Justice And American Due Process: Two Models For A Guarantee Of Basic Adjudicative Fairness, David M. Siegel
ExpressO
This paper traces how the Supreme Courts of Canada and the United States have each used the basic guarantee of adjudicative fairness in their respective constitutions to effect revolutions in their countries’ criminal justice systems, through two different jurisprudential models for this development. It identifies a relationship between two core constitutional structures, the basic guarantee and enumerated rights, and shows how this relationship can affect the degree to which entrenched constitutional rights actually protect individuals. It explains that the different models for the relationship between the basic guarantee and enumerated rights adopted in Canada and the United States, an “expansive …