Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Confrontation At Capital Sentencing Hearings: Illinois Violates The Federal Constitution By Permitting Juries To Sentence Defendants To Death On The Basis Of Ordinarily Inadmissible Hearsay, Mark Silverstein

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

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.

Solving The Pretext Puzzle: The Importance Of Ulterior Motives And Fabrications In The Supreme Court's Fourth Amendment Pretext Doctrine, Edwin J. Butterfoss

Faculty Scholarship

This Article first analyzes the debate between Professors John M. Burkoff and James B. Haddad over the current state of Supreme Court jurisprudence on the pretext issue. It shows that the Supreme Court's definition of pretext is broader than the definition of pretext used by these commentators. The Supreme Court's definition includes both "legal" and fabricated pretexts. In a "legal" pretext, the government offers a justification that is not the true reason for the police activity, but that, if the motivation of the officer is not considered, legally justifies the activity. In a fabricated pretext, the government offers a justification …

Foreword: Structuring Sentencing Discretion: The New Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Ilene H. Nagel

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

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

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

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 …

Amending The Oversight: Legislative Drafting And The Cable Act, Michael I. Meyerson

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Book Review, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.

A Conceptual, Practical, And Political Guide To Rico Reform, Gerard E. Lynch

Faculty Scholarship

RICO is nearing its twentieth birthday, but it may not be a happy one. In fact, 'tis the season for critics of RICO to be, if not jolly, at least highly active. A House subcommittee and the Senate Judiciary Committee have held hearings on RICO reform, the popular and business press has published numerous debates and criticisms involving fairly arcane points of civil and criminal law, scholars and lawyers have filled law reviews and legal newspapers with articles often critical of the statute, and the pressure has been building for statutory changes.

As the pressure for change has intensified, and …

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, …

Tape Recording Conversations - Is It Ethical For Attorneys?, Charles W. Adams

Articles, Chapters in Books and Other Contributions to Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

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

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Determinants Of Judicial Waiver Decisions For Violent Juvenile Offenders, Jeffrey Fagan, Elizabeth Piper Deschens

Faculty Scholarship

The selection of jurisdiction for adjudicating juvenile crime today is one of the most controversial debates in crime control policy, reflecting differences in assumptions about the causes of crime and philosophies of jurisprudence and punishment. For adolescent offenders, especially violent youth whose behaviors may pose particular social danger, critics view the traditional goals of the juvenile court and the "best interests of the child" standard as being at odds with public concerns for retribution and incapacitation of criminals. The choice between jurisdictions is a choice between the nominally rehabilitative dispositions of the juvenile court and the explicitly punitive dispositions of …

"Carrot And Stick" Sentencing: Structuring Incentives For Organizational Defendants, John C. Coffee Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

The new "Draft Guidelines for Organizational Defendants" released by the U.S. Sentencing Commission on October 25, 1990, explicitly adopt a "'carrot and stick' approach" to sentencing. While the boldly instrumental use made of sentencing penalties and credits in these guidelines will trouble some, the larger question is whether the Commission's social engineering will work. Two issues stand out: First, is the Commission's carrot mightier than its stick? At first glance, this may seem a surprising question because the "stick" in the Commission's guidelines seemingly packs a Ruthian wallop: fines under the draft guidelines are based on a multiple of the …

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 Fixed-Price Preemptive Right In The Community Land Trust Lease: A Valid Response To The Housing Crisis Or An Invalid Restraint On Alienation?, Christopher A. Seeger

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

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

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Habeas Corpus Committee - Correspondence, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.

Habeas Corpus Committee

No abstract provided.

When Will The Idling Statute Of Limitations Start Running In Rico Conspiracy Cases, Ellen Jancko-Baken

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure—"Drug Courier Profile" Characteristics Are Sufficient To Establish Reasonable Suspicion Of Criminal Conduct. United States V. Sokolow, Alec Farmer

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Use Of Force Against Terrorist Bases: Introduction, Malvina Halberstam

Articles

No abstract provided.

Contradiction And Critical Legal Studies, David G. Carlson

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Future Disabilities Under New York’S Human Rights Law, Andrea Lisa Leeb

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court And The Incredible Shrinking Fourth Amendment, Bruce G. Berner

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Truth In Sentencing: Accepting Responsibility Under The United States Sentencing Guidelines, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

The United States Sentencing Guidelines (hereinafter Guidelines) allow federal district courts to reduce a defendant's sentence if the defendant "clearly demonstrates a recognition and affirmative acceptance of personal responsibility for his criminal conduct .... " In United States v. Perez-Franco, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that the above Guidelines section on acceptance of responsibility did not require a defendant to accept responsibility for charges that were to be dismissed as part of a plea agreement. The Perez-Franco decision is an affront to the fundamental principle that a defendant ought to take personal responsibility for …

Equivalent Deterrence: A Proposed Alternative To The Exclusionary Rule In Criminal Proceedings, Robert M. Hardaway

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

Perhaps no other area of American jurisprudence is as controversial as the exclusionary rule. Rejected by all other civilized countries2 and held in contempt by much of the American public, the rule reached its zenith during the Warren Court, only to be chipped away a little at a time by the Burger Court. Indeed, if the rule is ever to die, it seems destined to go out with a whimper rather than a bang. . .