Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Law (174)
- Courts (53)
- State and Local Government Law (36)
- Constitutional Law (33)
- Judges (32)
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (31)
- Evidence (30)
- Civil Procedure (22)
- Legislation (18)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (17)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (16)
- Law and Society (16)
- Fourth Amendment (15)
- Law and Race (14)
- Law and Politics (13)
- Juvenile Law (11)
- Property Law and Real Estate (11)
- Family Law (9)
- Business Organizations Law (8)
- Civil Law (8)
- Estates and Trusts (8)
- Administrative Law (6)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (6)
- Law and Economics (6)
- Law and Psychology (6)
- Health Law and Policy (5)
- Insurance Law (5)
- Law and Gender (5)
- Keyword
-
- Death penalty (18)
- Criminal (17)
- Execution (17)
- Punishment (16)
- Virginia (16)
-
- Criminal procedure (14)
- Capital (13)
- Sentencing (13)
- Death (12)
- Evidence (12)
- Jury (12)
- Supreme Court (12)
- Capital punishment (11)
- Penalty (10)
- Miranda v. Arizona (9)
- Criminal law (8)
- Double jeopardy (8)
- Fourth Amendment (8)
- Trial (8)
- Witness (8)
- Annual Survey of Virginia Law (7)
- Johnson v. Commonwealth (7)
- Plea (7)
- Race (7)
- Defendant (6)
- Eighth Amendment (6)
- Hearsay (6)
- Jones v. Commonwealth (6)
- Lethal injection (6)
- Search and seizure (6)
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 151 - 180 of 275
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
United States V. Booker: The Demise Of Mandatory Federal Sentencing Guidelines And The Return Of Indeterminate Sentencing, Jonathan Chiu
United States V. Booker: The Demise Of Mandatory Federal Sentencing Guidelines And The Return Of Indeterminate Sentencing, Jonathan Chiu
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Police Shootings Under The Fourth Amendment, Wayne C. Beyer
Police Shootings Under The Fourth Amendment, Wayne C. Beyer
Richmond Public Interest Law Review
The Fourth Amendment permits police to use deadly force when there is an imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death to themselves or others. Although the governing standard is well established in a general way, its application to particular facts and circumstances may not be clear to officers on the street. Unless a reasonable police officer would have understood that his/her decision to shoot was clearly constitutionally prohibited, the officer may be entitled to qualified immunity, a decision that the court can make on summary judgment before trial. Discussed first are shootings that are not subject to Fourth Amendment …
Hiibel V. Sixth Judicial District Court:Can Police Arrest Suspects For Withholding Their Names?, John Famum
Hiibel V. Sixth Judicial District Court:Can Police Arrest Suspects For Withholding Their Names?, John Famum
Richmond Public Interest Law Review
Suppose that someone calls the police and alerts them to a crime that has been committed. Using the information provided, the police stop you because you fit the description of the person reported. If the police ask your name, must you give it? The United States Supreme Court believes you must if the state you are in has passed a law requiring you to give your name. In a factual situation very similar to this, the United States Supreme Court held in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court that the Nevada law requiring a person to provide his name in …
Police Shootings Under The Fourth Amendment, Wayne C. Beyer
Police Shootings Under The Fourth Amendment, Wayne C. Beyer
Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest
The Fourth Amendment permits police to use deadly force when there is an imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death to themselves or others. Although the governing standard is well established in a general way, its application to particular facts and circumstances may not be clear to officers on the street. Unless a reasonable police officer would have understood that his/her decision to shoot was clearly constitutionally prohibited, the officer may be entitled to qualified immunity, a decision that the court can make on summary judgment before trial. Discussed first are shootings that are not subject to Fourth Amendment …
Hiibel V. Sixth Judicial District Court:Can Police Arrest Suspects For Withholding Their Names?, John Famum
Hiibel V. Sixth Judicial District Court:Can Police Arrest Suspects For Withholding Their Names?, John Famum
Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest
Suppose that someone calls the police and alerts them to a crime that has been committed. Using the information provided, the police stop you because you fit the description of the person reported. If the police ask your name, must you give it? The United States Supreme Court believes you must if the state you are in has passed a law requiring you to give your name. In a factual situation very similar to this, the United States Supreme Court held in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court that the Nevada law requiring a person to provide his name in …
An Evidentiary Paradox: Defending The Character Evidence Prohibition By Upholding A Non-Character Theory Of Logical Relevance, The Doctrine Of Chances, Edward J. Imwinkelried
An Evidentiary Paradox: Defending The Character Evidence Prohibition By Upholding A Non-Character Theory Of Logical Relevance, The Doctrine Of Chances, Edward J. Imwinkelried
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Criminal Law And Procedure, Marla G. Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough
Criminal Law And Procedure, Marla G. Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Does Time Eclipse Crime? Stogner V. California And The Court's Determination Of The Ex Post Facto Limitations On Retroactive Justice, Ryan D. Frei
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
New Technology, Old Defenses: Internet Sting Operations And Attempt Liability, Audrey Rogers
New Technology, Old Defenses: Internet Sting Operations And Attempt Liability, Audrey Rogers
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
America's War On Drugs And Guns: The Detriments Of The Possession Standard In The Context Of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, Christan C. Rhoton
America's War On Drugs And Guns: The Detriments Of The Possession Standard In The Context Of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, Christan C. Rhoton
Richmond Public Interest Law Review
America's "War on Drugs" has resulted in federal legislation and sentencing guidelines that provide harsh penalties for crimes involving both drugs and guns. In particular, Title 18, Section 924(c)(1)(A) of the United States Code, which applies specifically to guns in the context of drug-related offenses, establishes mandatory punishments, ranging from five years to ten years imprisonment, depending upon the defendant's use or possession of the firearm. Congress amended Section 924 to include the term "possession" several years after the United States Supreme Court's decision in Bailey v. United States. The United States Supreme Court interpreted the "use" requirement of Section …
Tip-Based Warrantless Searches And Seizures Under The Rubric Of The Investigativedetention Exception To The Warrant Requirement: What Law Enforcementpersonnel Must Understand About Exclusion And Training, Brian Decker
Richmond Public Interest Law Review
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Tip-Based Warrantless Searches And Seizures Under The Rubric Of The Investigativedetention Exception To The Warrant Requirement: What Law Enforcementpersonnel Must Understand About Exclusion And Training, Brian Decker
Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
America's War On Drugs And Guns: The Detriments Of The Possessionstandard In The Context Of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, Christan C. Rhoton
America's War On Drugs And Guns: The Detriments Of The Possessionstandard In The Context Of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, Christan C. Rhoton
Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest
America's "War on Drugs" has resulted in federal legislation and sentencing guidelines that provide harsh penalties for crimes involving both drugs and guns. In particular, Title 18, Section 924(c)(1)(A) of the United States Code, which applies specifically to guns in the context of drug-related offenses, establishes mandatory punishments, ranging from five years to ten years imprisonment, depending upon the defendant's use or possession of the firearm. Congress amended Section 924 to include the term "possession" several years after the United States Supreme Court's decision in Bailey v. United States. The United States Supreme Court interpreted the "use" requirement of Section …
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.
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 …
Criminal Law, Marla Graff Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough
Criminal Law, Marla Graff Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Atkins V. Virginia: The Court's Failure To Recognize What Lies Beneath, Jaime L. Henshaw
Atkins V. Virginia: The Court's Failure To Recognize What Lies Beneath, Jaime L. Henshaw
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Assassination, The War On Terrorism, And The Constitution, Rodney A. Smolla
Assassination, The War On Terrorism, And The Constitution, Rodney A. Smolla
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Admissibility As Cause And Effect: Considering Affirmative Rights Under The Confrontation Clause, John G. Douglass
Admissibility As Cause And Effect: Considering Affirmative Rights Under The Confrontation Clause, John G. Douglass
Law Faculty Publications
In this essay, I first examine some of the strategic choices spawned by the Supreme Court's "microscopic" focus on reliability in confrontation-hearsay cases. Rather than promoting the value at the core of the Confrontation Clause-the adversarial testing of prosecution evidence-the Court's approach leads to choices that ignore that value. While the Court scrutinizes hearsay under the microscope of reliability, it leaves the parties free to ignore and even to avoid available opportunities for effective confrontation of the hearsay declarant. At the same time, the Court's constitutional definition of reliability-which it equates with "firmly rooted" hearsay exceptions -has encouraged prosecutors to …
Dusenbery V. United States: Setting The Standard For Adequate Notice, W. Alexander Burnett
Dusenbery V. United States: Setting The Standard For Adequate Notice, W. Alexander Burnett
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Two Sides Of A "Sargasso Sea": Successive Prosecution For The "Same Offence" In The United States And The United Kingdom, Lissa Griffin
Two Sides Of A "Sargasso Sea": Successive Prosecution For The "Same Offence" In The United States And The United Kingdom, Lissa Griffin
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Virtual Cross-Examination: The Art Of Impeaching Hearsay, John G. Douglass
Virtual Cross-Examination: The Art Of Impeaching Hearsay, John G. Douglass
Law Faculty Publications
Trial lawyers and judges are quite accustomed to courtroom battles over the admissibility of hearsay. But relatively few have much experience at challenging the credibility of hearsay. Once hearsay is admitted in evidence, even the ablest advocates typically proceed as if the hearsay battle were over, at least until the appeal. Few lawyers take advantage of the opportunities available to impeach the hearsay declarant. Consider the perspective of one experienced trial judge: I sometimes wonder at what seems to me the passing up of golden opportunities by the able advocate. Foremost among these lost opportunities is the virtual total neglect …
Criminal Law And Procedure, Julie E. Mcconnell, Gregory Franklin, Craig Winston Stallard
Criminal Law And Procedure, Julie E. Mcconnell, Gregory Franklin, Craig Winston Stallard
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Accuracy Where It Matters: Brady V. Maryland In The Plea Bargaining Context, Corinna Barrett Lain
Accuracy Where It Matters: Brady V. Maryland In The Plea Bargaining Context, Corinna Barrett Lain
Law Faculty Publications
Professor Lain argues that the role of Brady v. Maryland in protecting the innocent from wrongful conviction is just as essential in the plea bargaining context as it is at trial, and that therefore even defendants who plead guilty should be entitled to Brady's protections. However, she concludes that Brady's application in the plea bargaining context is destined to provide only a shadow of the protection Brady provides at trial because of the materiality standard currently used to judge post-plea Brady claims. In making both points, she employs a model of the plea bargaining defendant's decision-making process, using modern choice …
University Of Richmond Law Review
University Of Richmond Law Review
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Confronting The Reluctant Accomplice, John G. Douglass
Confronting The Reluctant Accomplice, John G. Douglass
Law Faculty Publications
The Supreme Court treats the Confrontation Clause as a rule of evidence that excludes unreliable hearsay. But where the hearsay declarant is an accomplice who refuses to testify at defendant's trial, the Court's approach leads prosecutors and defendants to ignore real opportunities for confrontation, while they debate the reliability of hearsay. And even where the Court's doctrine excludes hearsay, it leads prosecutors to purchase the accomplice's testimony through a process that raises equally serious questions of reliability. Thus, the Court's approach promotes neither reliability nor confrontation. This Article advocates an approach that applies the Confrontation Clause to hearsay declarants in …
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Criminal Law And Procedure, William J. Dinkin, Cullen D. Seltzer
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Criminal Law And Procedure, William J. Dinkin, Cullen D. Seltzer
University of Richmond Law Review
Because a large amount of the docket for the Court of Appeals of Virginia is comprised of criminal cases, and since the General Assembly regularly turns its attention to the questions of crime and punishment, in almost any year there are a great number of substantial developments in the criminal law. This past year was no exception. This article surveys developments in criminal law and procedure in Virginia from July 2000 to July 2001. Although this article is intended to survey significant developments over the past year, the reader is cautioned to bear in mind several important caveats.
Fatal Attraction? The Uneasy Courtship Of Brady And Plea Bargaining, John G. Douglass
Fatal Attraction? The Uneasy Courtship Of Brady And Plea Bargaining, John G. Douglass
Law Faculty Publications
Part I of this Article discusses the natural attraction between Brady-a rule requiring disclosure of evidence favorable to a defendant-and plea bargaining-a practice where such information is at a premium for defendants. Part II describes how an increasing number of courts have adapted Brady to fit in the world of a plea bargain, in the process changing Brady's point of reference from the jury's verdict to the defendant's tactical decision to plead guilty. Part ill argues that this change in focus narrows Brady's substantive coverage and renders the rule practically unenforceable following most guilty pleas. Part IV then assesses the …
Balancing Hearsay And Criminal Discovery, John G. Douglass
Balancing Hearsay And Criminal Discovery, John G. Douglass
Law Faculty Publications
and prosecutors. Part I of this Article argues that the conventional theory of hearsaydiscovery balance does not reflect the reality of modem federal practice. An imbalance has arisen because, in the last quarter century, developments in the law of evidence and confrontation are at odds with developments-or one might say nondevelopments-in the law of criminal discovery. Since enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence in 1975, both the law of evidence and modem Confrontation Clause doctrine have evolved toward broader admission of hearsay in criminal cases. Contrary to conventional theory, that evolution has at least matched-and probably has outpaced-the trend …
University Of Richmond Law Review
University Of Richmond Law Review
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.