Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (237)
- Seattle University School of Law (197)
- Universitas Indonesia (121)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (99)
- University of Richmond (31)
-
- William & Mary Law School (27)
- University of Colorado Law School (24)
- Emory University School of Law (12)
- St. John's University School of Law (12)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (11)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (10)
- UIC School of Law (10)
- Columbia Law School (8)
- Roger Williams University (8)
- St. Mary's University (8)
- The University of Akron (8)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (7)
- American University Washington College of Law (6)
- Georgia State University College of Law (6)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (6)
- University of Miami Law School (6)
- University of Georgia School of Law (5)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (5)
- Fordham Law School (4)
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (4)
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (4)
- University of Baltimore Law (4)
- Liberty University (3)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (3)
- University of New Hampshire (3)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (198)
- Police (109)
- Supreme Court (84)
- Sixth Amendment (80)
- Constitution (76)
-
- Federal (64)
- Fifth Amendment (62)
- Miranda v. Arizona (58)
- Admissibility (52)
- Defendant (52)
- State (52)
- Testimony (45)
- Searches (44)
- Confrontation Clause (43)
- Fourth Amendment (43)
- New York (42)
- Due process (41)
- Evidence (41)
- Exclusionary rule (40)
- Confessions (37)
- Witnesses (35)
- § 6 (34)
- Court of Appeals (33)
- Custodial interrogations (33)
- 1990) (31)
- Seizures (31)
- Death penalty (30)
- Crawford v. Washington (29)
- Criminal procedure (29)
- Cross-examination (28)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (197)
- "Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI (121)
- Articles (103)
- Touro Law Review (94)
- Michigan Law Review (85)
-
- University of Richmond Law Review (27)
- Publications (24)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (17)
- Faculty Publications (15)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (15)
- Book Chapters (13)
- Faculty Articles (13)
- Faculty Scholarship (13)
- Supreme Court Preview (12)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (10)
- UIC Law Review (9)
- Akron Law Review (8)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (7)
- Scholarly Articles (7)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (6)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (6)
- All Faculty Scholarship (4)
- Faculty Publications By Year (4)
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (4)
- Popular Media (4)
- Scholarly Works (4)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (3)
- Fordham Urban Law Journal (3)
- Georgia Law Review (3)
- Michigan Law Review Online (3)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 871 - 900 of 948
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
New Hearsay Exceptions For A Child's Statement Of Sexual Abuse, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (1984), Glen Skoler
New Hearsay Exceptions For A Child's Statement Of Sexual Abuse, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (1984), Glen Skoler
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Felony-Murder Rule: A Doctrine At Constitutional Crossroads, Nelson E. Roth, Scott E. Sundby
The Felony-Murder Rule: A Doctrine At Constitutional Crossroads, Nelson E. Roth, Scott E. Sundby
Articles
No abstract provided.
On Complaining About The Burger Court, Robert F. Nagel
On Complaining About The Burger Court, Robert F. Nagel
Publications
No abstract provided.
Gates, 'Probable Cause', 'Good Faith', And Beyond, Yale Kamisar
Gates, 'Probable Cause', 'Good Faith', And Beyond, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Illinois v. Gates1 was the most eagerly awaited constitutional-criminal procedure case of the 1982 Term. I think it fair to say, however, that it was awaited a good deal more eagerly by law enforcement officials and the Americans for Effective Law Enforcement than by defense lawyers and the American Civil Liberties Union. As it turned out, of course, the Gates Court, to the disappointment of many, did not reach the question whether the exclusionary rule in search and seizure cases should be modified so as not to require the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of the fourth amendment when …
Miranda: The Case, The Man, And The Players, Yale Kamisar
Miranda: The Case, The Man, And The Players, Yale Kamisar
Reviews
On the eve of America's bicentennial, the American Bar Association told its members of a plan to publish a book about the "milestone events" in 200 years of American legal history, and invited them to vote on the milestones to be included. When the balloting was over, Miranda v. Arizona1 - "the high-water mark" of the Warren Court's revolution in American criminal procedure2 - had received the fourth highest number of votes.3 I venture to say that if members of the general public had been asked to list the "most regrettable" or "most unfortunate" milestones in American legal history, Miranda …
The Fourth Amendment As A Device For Protecting The Innocent, Arnold H. Loewy
The Fourth Amendment As A Device For Protecting The Innocent, Arnold H. Loewy
Michigan Law Review
Part I of this Article establishes that the government has a right to search for and seize evidence of crime. Part II develops the corollary proposition that the fourth amendment does not protect the right to secrete evidence of crime. Part III explores the impact of the reasonable expectation of privacy concept on the innocent. Part IV evaluates consent searches and their effect on the innocent. Finally, Part V considers the exclusionary rule as a device for protecting the innocent.
Forgotten Points In The "Exclusionary Rule" Debate, James Boyd White
Forgotten Points In The "Exclusionary Rule" Debate, James Boyd White
Michigan Law Review
Most contemporary discussions of the "exclusionary rule" assume or assert that this "rule" is not part of the fourth amendment, nor required by its terms, but is rather a judicial "remedy" that was fashioned to protect those rights (against unreasonable search and seizure) that actually are granted by the fourth amendment. The protection is said to work by "deterring" official violations; this is, however, an odd use of the word, for the rule does not punish violations but merely deprives the government of some of the benefits that might ensue from them, namely the use in the criminal case of …
The Warren Court (Was It Really So Defense-Minded?), The Burger Court (Is It Really So Prosecution-Oriented?), And Police Investigatory Practices, Yale Kamisar
Book Chapters
In one sense the Warren Court's "revolution" in American criminal procedure may be said to. have been launched by the 1956 case of Griffin v. Illinois (establishing an indigent criminal defendant's right to a free transcript on appeal, at least under certain circumstances) and to have been significantly advanced by two 1963 cases: Gideon v. Wainwright (entitling an indigent defendant to free counsel, at least in serious criminal cases) and Douglas v. California (requiring a state to provide an indigent with counsel on his first appeal from a criminal conviction). But these were not the cases that plunged the Warren …
Criminal Procedure, The Burger Court, And The Legacy Of The Warren Court, Jerold H. Israel
Criminal Procedure, The Burger Court, And The Legacy Of The Warren Court, Jerold H. Israel
Book Chapters
Richard Nixon's criticism of the Warren Court during the 1968 presidential campaign centered largely on the Court's handling of cases involving criminal rights. According to candidate Nixon, the Court had gone much too far. It had twisted the Constitution to serve its own purposes, created a maze of legal technicalities that worked only to frustrate legitimate law enforcement efforts, and so weakened "the peace forces as against the criminal forces in this country" as to be largely responsible for the sharp rise in crime that had occurred in the sixties. What had to be done, continued Nixon, was to appoint …
Does (Did) (Should) The Exclusionary Rule Rest On A 'Principled Basis' Rather Than An 'Empirical Proposition'?, Yale Kamisar
Does (Did) (Should) The Exclusionary Rule Rest On A 'Principled Basis' Rather Than An 'Empirical Proposition'?, Yale Kamisar
Articles
[U]ntil the [exclusionary rule] rests on a principled basis rather than an empirical proposition, [the rule] will remain in a state of unstable equilibrium. Mapp v. Ohio, which overruled the then twelve-year-old Wolf case and imposed the fourth amendment exclusionary rule (the Weeks doctrine) on the states as a matter of fourteenth amendment due process, seemed to mark the end of an era. Concurring in Mapp, Justice Douglas recalled that Wolf had evoked "a storm of constitutional controversy which only today finds its end."' But in the two decades since Justice Douglas made this observation, the storm of controversy has …
Stone V. Powell And The Effective Assistance Of Counsel, Michigan Law Review
Stone V. Powell And The Effective Assistance Of Counsel, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Part I briefly identifies the considerations underlying the Stone Court's decision to limit habeas corpus review of fourth amendment claims. Part II then argues against applying Stone to the sixth amendment claim. After establishing the analytic difference between the two constitutional claims and examining Stone's "opportunity for full and fair litigation" standard, it concludes that Stone is fully consistent with free review of habeas corpus petitions alleging incompetent handling of fourth amendment questions. Finally, responding to a popular interpretation of Stone, Part II demonstrates that the possibility that ineffectiveness claims may not further the determination of a defendant's …
The Federal Speedy Trial Act: Stampede Into Ambush, 16 J. Marshall L. Rev. 27 (1982), Robert L. Doyel
The Federal Speedy Trial Act: Stampede Into Ambush, 16 J. Marshall L. Rev. 27 (1982), Robert L. Doyel
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Criminal Procedure, The Burger Court, And The Legacy Of The Warren Court, Jerold H. Israel
Criminal Procedure, The Burger Court, And The Legacy Of The Warren Court, Jerold H. Israel
Book Chapters
During the 1960s, the Warren Court's decisions in the field of criminal procedure were strongly denounced by many prosecutors, police officers, and conservative politicians. Some of these critics were careful in their description of the Warren Court's record. Others let their strong opposition to several of the Court's more highly publicized decisions destroy their perception of the Court's work as a whole.
A Dissent From The Miranda Dissents: Some Comments On The 'New' Fifth Amendment And The Old 'Voluntariness' Test, Yale Kamisar
A Dissent From The Miranda Dissents: Some Comments On The 'New' Fifth Amendment And The Old 'Voluntariness' Test, Yale Kamisar
Book Chapters
If the several conferences and workshops (and many lunch conversations) on police interrogation and confessions in which I have participated this past summer are any indication, Miranda v. Arizona has evoked much anger and spread much sorrow among judges, lawyers and professors. In the months and years ahead, such reaction is likely to be translated into microscopic analyses and relentless, probing criticism of the majority opinion. During this period of agonizing appraisal and reappraisal, I think it important that various assumptions and assertions in the dissenting opinions do not escape attention.
Search And Seizure Of America: The Case For Keeping The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
Search And Seizure Of America: The Case For Keeping The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Twenty years ago, concurring in Mapp v. Ohio (1961), Justice William 0. Douglas looked back on Wolf v. Colorado (1949) (which had held that the Fourth Amendment's substantive protection against "unreasonable search and seizure" was binding on the states through the due process clause, but that the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule was not) and recalled that the Wolf case had evoked "a storm of controversy which only today finds its end." But, of course, in the twenty years since Justice Douglas made that observation the storm of controversy has only intensified, and it has engulfed the exclusionary rule in federal …
On Recognizing Variations In State Criminal Procedure, Jerold H. Israel
On Recognizing Variations In State Criminal Procedure, Jerold H. Israel
Articles
Everyone recognizes that the laws governing criminal procedure vary somewhat from state to state. There is often a tendency, however, to underestimate the degree of diversity that exists. Even some of the most experienced practitioners believe that aside from variations on some minor matters, such as the number of peremptory challenges granted, and variation on a few major items, such as the use of the grand jury, the basic legal standards governing most procedures are approximately the same in a large majority of states. I have seen varied evidence of this misconception in practitioner discussions of law reform proposals, particularly …
Assaults On The Exclusionary Rule: Good Faith Limitations And Damage Remedies, Pierre J. Schlag
Assaults On The Exclusionary Rule: Good Faith Limitations And Damage Remedies, Pierre J. Schlag
Publications
No abstract provided.
Griffin V. California: Still Viable After All These Years, Craig M. Bradley
Griffin V. California: Still Viable After All These Years, Craig M. Bradley
Michigan Law Review
In a recent article in the Michigan Law Review, Donald Ayer levels a series of attacks on the Griffin decision. Specifically, he maintains that the decision is at once too broad, because it requires "almost automatic reversal where there are any remarks explicitly focused on the defendant's silence and the inference of guilt to be drawn from it" regardless of the strength of the prosecution's case, and too narrow, because it fails to prevent the natural prejudice against the nontestifying defendant that may arise in the minds of the jurors without any encouragement from prosecutor or judge. Ayer also …
Interrogation Without Questions: Rhode Island V. Innis And United States V. Henry, Welsh S. White
Interrogation Without Questions: Rhode Island V. Innis And United States V. Henry, Welsh S. White
Michigan Law Review
In Rhode Island v. Innis, the Court defined "interrogation" within the meaning of Miranda; and in United States v. Henry, it defined "deliberate elicitation" within the meaning of Massiah. This article explores the implications of Innis and Henry, suggests readings of the new tests consistent with their purposes, and applies the tests to several situations where the scope of the fifth and sixth amendment protections remains unclear.
The Fifth Amendment And The Inference Of Guilt From Silence: Griffin V. California After Fifteen Years, Donald B. Ayer
The Fifth Amendment And The Inference Of Guilt From Silence: Griffin V. California After Fifteen Years, Donald B. Ayer
Michigan Law Review
This Article will begin with an examination of the historic (and present) purposes underlying the fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination, upon which any justification of the no-comment rule must ultimately rest. It will explore the danger that these purposes may be thwarted not only when defendants are actually compelled to be witnesses against themselves, but also when significant burdens are placed on defendants who choose not to testify. In Griffin, the Court reasoned that comment on the defendant's silence amounted to such an impermissible burden. But the Court failed to examine the weight of this burden. This failure makes …
Fourth Amendment Standing And Expectations Of Privacy: Rakas V. Illinois And New Directions For Some Old Concepts, Richard A. Williamson
Fourth Amendment Standing And Expectations Of Privacy: Rakas V. Illinois And New Directions For Some Old Concepts, Richard A. Williamson
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The Future Of Confrontation, Peter K. Westen
The Future Of Confrontation, Peter K. Westen
Michigan Law Review
The Supreme Court seems to be setting the stage for a long-awaited examination of the confrontation clause. It has been ten years since the Court endeavored in Dutton v. Evans to reconcile the evidentiary rules of hearsay with the constitutional commands of confrontation. Dutton came at the tail end of a string of confrontation cases that the Court had resolved without apparent difficulty. Not surprisingly, the Court approached Dutton in the evident belief that it could resolve the constitutional problems of hearsay once and for all. Instead, after oral argument in 1969 and a rehearing in 1970, the Court found …
The Exclusionary Rule In Historical Perspective: The Struggle To Make The Fourth Amendment More Than 'An Empty Blessing', Yale Kamisar
The Exclusionary Rule In Historical Perspective: The Struggle To Make The Fourth Amendment More Than 'An Empty Blessing', Yale Kamisar
Articles
In the 65 years since the Supreme Court adopted the exclusionary rule, few critics have attacked it with as much vigor and on as many fronts as did Judge Malcolm Wilkey in his recent Judicature article, "The exclusionary rule: why suppress valid evidence?" (November 1978).
A Defense Of The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
A Defense Of The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
Articles
The exclusionary rule is being flayed with increasing vigor by a number of unrelated sources and with a variety of arguments. Some critics find it unworkable and resort to empirically based arguments. Others see it as the product of a belated and unwarranted judicial interpretation. Still others, uncertain whether the rule works, are confident that in some fashion law enforcement's hands are tied. Professor Yale Kamisar, long a defender of the exclusionary rule, reviews the current attacks on the rule and offers a vigorous rebuttal. He finds it difficult to accept that there is a line for acceptable police conduct …
Exclusionary Rule: Reasonable Remarks On Unreasonable Search And Seizure, Yale Kamisar
Exclusionary Rule: Reasonable Remarks On Unreasonable Search And Seizure, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Can we live with the so-called exclusionary rule, which bars the use of illegally gained evidence in criminal trials? Can the Fourth Amendment live without it? A growing number of lawyers and judges, including Chief Justice Warren Burger, have called for abandonment of the rule, usually on the ground that it has not prevented illegal searches and seizures and on the ground that the rule has contributed significantly to the increase in crime. No one has convincingly demonstrated a causal link between the high rate of crime in America and the exclusionary rule, and I do not believe that any …
Prosecutorial Discretion, Plea Bargaining And The Supreme Court's Opinion In Bordenkircher V. Hayes, William T. Pizzi
Prosecutorial Discretion, Plea Bargaining And The Supreme Court's Opinion In Bordenkircher V. Hayes, William T. Pizzi
Publications
No abstract provided.
Is The Exclusionary Rule An 'Illogical' Or 'Unnatural' Interpretation Of The Fourth Amendment?, Yale Kamisar
Is The Exclusionary Rule An 'Illogical' Or 'Unnatural' Interpretation Of The Fourth Amendment?, Yale Kamisar
Articles
More than 50 years have passed since the Supreme Court decided the Weeks case, barring the use in federal prosecutions of evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and the Silverthorne case, invoking what has come to be known as the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine. The justices who decided those cases would, I think, be quite surprised to learn that some day the value of the exclusionary rule would be measured by-and the very life of the rule might depend on-an empirical evaluation of its efficacy in deterring police misconduct. These justices were engaged in a less …
Brewer V. Williams, Massiah And Miranda: What Is 'Interrogation'? When Does It Matter?, Yale Kamisar
Brewer V. Williams, Massiah And Miranda: What Is 'Interrogation'? When Does It Matter?, Yale Kamisar
Articles
On Christmas Eve, 1968, a ten-year-old girl, Pamela Powers, disappeared while with her family in Des Moines, Iowa.2 Defendant Williams, an escapee from a mental institution and a deeply religious person, 3 was suspected of murdering her, and a warrant was issued for his arrest.4 Williams telephoned a Des Moines lawyer, McKnight, and on his advice surrendered himself to the Davenport, Iowa, police.5 Captain Learning and another Des Moines police officer arranged to drive the 160 miles to Davenport, pick up Williams, and return him directly to Des Moines. 6 Both the trial court 7 and the federal district court8 …
The Supreme Court, Warrantless Searches, And Exigent Circumstances, Richard A. Williamson
The Supreme Court, Warrantless Searches, And Exigent Circumstances, Richard A. Williamson
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Guiding Capital Sentencing Discretion Beyond The "Boiler Plate": Mental Disorder As A Mitigating Factor, James S. Liebman, Michael J. Shepard
Guiding Capital Sentencing Discretion Beyond The "Boiler Plate": Mental Disorder As A Mitigating Factor, James S. Liebman, Michael J. Shepard
Faculty Scholarship
In five decisions handed down on July 2, 1976, the United States Supreme Court held that the death penalty may be imposed for the crime of murder, so long as there are clear standards to guide the sentencing authority and the sanction is not imposed mandatorily. The authors examine the eighth amendment doctrinal framework used by the Court in the July 2 Cases, with particular reference to the requirement that individualized mitigating information be considered in the sentencing decision. Illustrating that requirement, they contend that mental disorder should be considered as a possibly mitigating factor and then suggest a standard …