Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Law (77)
- Constitutional Law (47)
- Evidence (30)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (16)
- Courts (12)
-
- Science and Technology Law (8)
- Civil Procedure (7)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (7)
- Fourteenth Amendment (7)
- Fourth Amendment (5)
- Law and Race (5)
- Jurisprudence (4)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (4)
- Legislation (4)
- State and Local Government Law (4)
- Immigration Law (3)
- Litigation (3)
- Administrative Law (2)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (2)
- Computer Law (2)
- Conflict of Laws (2)
- Family Law (2)
- Judges (2)
- Juvenile Law (2)
- Law and Gender (2)
- Law and Society (2)
- Privacy Law (2)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (1)
- Keyword
-
- Criminal procedure (30)
- Right to counsel (18)
- Defense (Criminal procedure) (16)
- Defense attorneys (16)
- Legal representation (15)
-
- Habeas corpus (13)
- Sentencing/Capital punishment (8)
- Sentencing (7)
- Constitutional law/United States (6)
- Criminal law (6)
- Evidence (6)
- Admissibility of evidence (5)
- Double jeopardy (5)
- Due process of law (5)
- Right to trial by jury (5)
- Identification (4)
- Misdemeanors (4)
- Self-incrimination (4)
- Witnesses (4)
- Administration of criminal justice (3)
- African American (3)
- Alleyne (3)
- Almendarez-Torres (3)
- Estoppel (3)
- Exclusionary rule (3)
- Extradition (3)
- Guilty plea (3)
- Juries (3)
- Jury decisionmaking (3)
- Search (3)
Articles 31 - 60 of 218
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
Individualized Sentencing, William W. Berry
Individualized Sentencing, William W. Berry
Washington and Lee Law Review
In Woodson v. North Carolina, the Supreme Court proscribed the use of mandatory death sentences. One year later, in Lockett v. Ohio, the Court expanded this principle to hold that defendants in capital cases were entitled to “individualized sentencing determinations.” The Court’s reasoning in both cases centered on the seriousness of the death penalty. Because the death penalty is “different” in its seriousness and irrevocability, the Court required the sentencing court, whether judge or jury, to assess the individualized characteristics of the offender and the offense before imposing a sentence. In 2012, the Court expanded this Eighth Amendment concept …
Sentence For The Damned: Using Atkins To Understand The “Irreparable Corruption” Standard For Juvenile Life Without Parole, Zachary Crawford-Pechukas
Sentence For The Damned: Using Atkins To Understand The “Irreparable Corruption” Standard For Juvenile Life Without Parole, Zachary Crawford-Pechukas
Washington and Lee Law Review
This Note suggests that guidance should be drawn from the Supreme Court’s death penalty jurisprudence regarding the execution of intellectually disabled offenders. Atkins v. Virginia paved the way for the juvenile sentencing cases as the Supreme Court for the first time found that, under the Eighth Amendment, a selected class of offenders—the intellectually disabled — were not eligible for the state’s harshest penalty—the death penalty— because of their diminished culpability. Atkins similarly left the state courts to figure out how to decide whether an individual offender met this amorphous standard, “intellectually disabled.” As state courts grappled with this standard and …
Expedited Removal And Due Process: “A Testing Crucible Of Basic Principle” In The Time Of Trump, Daniel Kanstroom
Expedited Removal And Due Process: “A Testing Crucible Of Basic Principle” In The Time Of Trump, Daniel Kanstroom
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Immigrant Defense Funds For Utopians, César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández
Immigrant Defense Funds For Utopians, César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
In Their Defense: Conflict Between The Criminal Defendant’S Right To Counsel Of Choice And The Right To Appointed Counsel, Kit Thomas
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Examining Rule 11(B)(1)(N) Error: Guilty Pleas, Appellate Waiver, And Dominguez Benitez, Leanna C. Minix
Examining Rule 11(B)(1)(N) Error: Guilty Pleas, Appellate Waiver, And Dominguez Benitez, Leanna C. Minix
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Waivering About The Dirty Business Of Plea Bargains—A Comment, Jonathan Shapiro
Waivering About The Dirty Business Of Plea Bargains—A Comment, Jonathan Shapiro
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Admissibility Of Trueallele: A Computerized Dna Interpretation System, Katherine L. Moss
The Admissibility Of Trueallele: A Computerized Dna Interpretation System, Katherine L. Moss
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Prior Convictions Exception: Examining The Continuing Viability Of Almendarez-Torres Under Alleyne, Meg E. Sawyer
The Prior Convictions Exception: Examining The Continuing Viability Of Almendarez-Torres Under Alleyne, Meg E. Sawyer
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Comment On The Prior Convictions Exception: Examining The Continuing Viability Of Almendarez-Torres Under Alleyne, Kevin Flynn
Comment On The Prior Convictions Exception: Examining The Continuing Viability Of Almendarez-Torres Under Alleyne, Kevin Flynn
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Irrelevance Of Prisoner Fault For Excessively Delayed Executions, Russell L. Christopher
The Irrelevance Of Prisoner Fault For Excessively Delayed Executions, Russell L. Christopher
Washington and Lee Law Review
Are decades-long delays between sentencing and execution immune from Eighth Amendment violation because they are self-inflicted by prisoners, or is such prisoner fault for delays simply irrelevant to whether a state-imposed punishment is cruel and unusual? Typically finding delay to be the state’s responsibility, Justices Breyer and Stevens argue that execution following upwards of forty years of death row incarceration is unconstitutional. Nearly every lower court disagrees, reasoning that prisoners have the choice of pursuing appellate and collateral review (with the delay that entails) or crafting the perfect remedy to any delay by submitting, as Justice Thomas has invited complaining …
The Prior Convictions Exception—A Comment, Matthew Engle
The Prior Convictions Exception—A Comment, Matthew Engle
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Virginia’S Redefinition Of The “Future Dangerousness” Aggravating Factor: Unprecedented, Unfounded, And Unconstitutional , Lara D. Gass
Virginia’S Redefinition Of The “Future Dangerousness” Aggravating Factor: Unprecedented, Unfounded, And Unconstitutional , Lara D. Gass
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Toward A Right To Litigate Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel, Ty Alper
Toward A Right To Litigate Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel, Ty Alper
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Why Gideon Failed: Politics And Feedback Loops In The Reform Of Criminal Justice, Donald A. Dripps
Why Gideon Failed: Politics And Feedback Loops In The Reform Of Criminal Justice, Donald A. Dripps
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Heeding Gideon’S Call In The Twenty-First Century: Holistic Defense And The New Public Defense Paradigm, Robin Steinberg
Heeding Gideon’S Call In The Twenty-First Century: Holistic Defense And The New Public Defense Paradigm, Robin Steinberg
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Problem With Misdemeanor Representation, Erica Hashimoto
The Problem With Misdemeanor Representation, Erica Hashimoto
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Gideon Skepticism, Alexandra Natapoff
Gideon Skepticism, Alexandra Natapoff
Washington and Lee Law Review
The criminal defense lawyer occupies a special doctrinal place in criminal procedure. It is the primary structural guarantor of fairness, the single most important source of validation for individual convictions. Conversely, if a person did have a competent lawyer, it generates a set of presumptions that his trial was in fact fair, the evidence sufficient, and his plea knowing and voluntary. This is a highly problematic legal fiction. The presence of counsel advances but cannot guarantee fair trials and voluntary pleas. More fundamentally, a lawyer in an individual case will often be powerless to address a wide variety of systemic …
Crashing The Misdemeanor System, Jenny Roberts
Crashing The Misdemeanor System, Jenny Roberts
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Two Rights To Counsel, Josh Bowers
Two Rights To Counsel, Josh Bowers
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Too Poor To Hire A Lawyer But Not Indigent: How States Use The Federal Poverty Guidelines To Deprive Defendants Of Their Sixth Amendment Right To Counsel, John P. Gross
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Criminal Defense Lawyer Moneyball: A Demonstration Project, Ronald F. Wright, Ralph A. Peeples
Criminal Defense Lawyer Moneyball: A Demonstration Project, Ronald F. Wright, Ralph A. Peeples
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Unstoppable V. Unwaivable, Steven Benjamin
Unstoppable V. Unwaivable, Steven Benjamin
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Shrinking Gideon And Expanding Alternatives To Lawyers, Stephanos Bibas
Shrinking Gideon And Expanding Alternatives To Lawyers, Stephanos Bibas
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Getting Real About Gideon: The Next Fifty Years Of Enforcing The Right To Counsel, Cara H. Drinan
Getting Real About Gideon: The Next Fifty Years Of Enforcing The Right To Counsel, Cara H. Drinan
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
“Potential Innocence”: Making The Most Of A Bleak Environment For Public Support Of Indigent Defense, Robert P. Mosteller
“Potential Innocence”: Making The Most Of A Bleak Environment For Public Support Of Indigent Defense, Robert P. Mosteller
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Lamentations, Celebrations, And Innovations: Gideon At 50, John D. King
Lamentations, Celebrations, And Innovations: Gideon At 50, John D. King
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Validating The Right To Counsel, Brandon L. Garrett
Validating The Right To Counsel, Brandon L. Garrett
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Gideon Was A Prisoner: On Criminal Defense In A Time Of Mass Incarceration, Abbe Smith
Gideon Was A Prisoner: On Criminal Defense In A Time Of Mass Incarceration, Abbe Smith
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Why Strickland Is The Wrong Test For Violations Of The Right To Testify, Daniel J. Capra, Joseph Tartakovsky
Why Strickland Is The Wrong Test For Violations Of The Right To Testify, Daniel J. Capra, Joseph Tartakovsky
Washington and Lee Law Review
A criminal accused has a constitutional right to testify in his own defense. The right has an undisputed place alongside the most important “personal” rights, like the right to remain silent or the right to represent oneself. But in the 1990s, courts began to apply the ineffective-assistance test of Strickland v. Washington to evaluate claims by a defendant that his right to testify was abridged. In practice this nullifies the right. Moreover, the Strickland test is inapposite because it focuses on counsel and not the defendant’s right to testify. This Article proposes a new test to better secure and enforce …