Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Law (74)
- Constitutional Law (52)
- Courts (44)
- State and Local Government Law (39)
- Supreme Court of the United States (37)
-
- Jurisprudence (31)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (29)
- Judges (27)
- Fourteenth Amendment (21)
- Evidence (20)
- Litigation (19)
- Fourth Amendment (14)
- Civil Procedure (5)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (5)
- Family Law (5)
- Food and Drug Law (5)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (5)
- Legal Profession (5)
- Social Welfare Law (5)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (4)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (3)
- Law and Politics (3)
- Law and Society (3)
- Legal Studies (3)
- Criminology and Criminal Justice (2)
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law (2)
- Legal History (2)
- Legal Writing and Research (2)
- Institution
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (36)
- Mercer University School of Law (20)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (18)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (13)
- University of Michigan Law School (7)
-
- Brigham Young University Law School (5)
- UIC School of Law (4)
- Cornell University Law School (3)
- New York Law School (3)
- University of Colorado Law School (3)
- West Virginia University (3)
- William & Mary Law School (3)
- Campbell University School of Law (2)
- Florida State University College of Law (2)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (2)
- University of Miami Law School (2)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (2)
- University of Montana (2)
- University of Richmond (2)
- University of Washington School of Law (2)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (2)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Columbia Law School (1)
- Loyola University Chicago, School of Law (1)
- Osgoode Hall Law School of York University (1)
- Pace University (1)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (1)
- University of Baltimore Law (1)
- University of New Hampshire (1)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- 1990) (32)
- New York (32)
- Federal (31)
- State (31)
- Constitution (28)
-
- N.Y. Cont. Art. I (26)
- Defendant (21)
- Court of Appeals (19)
- § 6 (16)
- Capital punishment (15)
- Supreme Court (13)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (12)
- § 1 (12)
- Evidence (11)
- U.S. Cont. Amend. V (10)
- U.S. Cont. Amend. XIV (10)
- Due process (9)
- Police (9)
- Criminal (8)
- United States (8)
- Appellate Division (7)
- Jury (7)
- U.S. Cont. Amend. VI (7)
- Violated (7)
- Constitutional (6)
- Court (6)
- Judge (6)
- Statute (6)
- Trial judge (6)
- § 11 (6)
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (35)
- Mercer Law Review (20)
- Capital Defense Journal (14)
- Cardozo Law Review (12)
- Articles (8)
-
- Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law (5)
- UIC Law Review (4)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (4)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (3)
- Faculty Scholarship (3)
- Publications (3)
- West Virginia Law Review (3)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (2)
- Campbell Law Review (2)
- Court Decisions (2)
- Faculty Works (2)
- Florida State University Law Review (2)
- Michigan Law Review (2)
- University of Richmond Law Review (2)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (2)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Articles & Book Chapters (1)
- Bar Associations (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Faculty Publications (1)
- Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Loyola University Chicago Law Journal (1)
- McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 148
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
Criminal Law, Frank C. Mills Iii
Criminal Law, Frank C. Mills Iii
Mercer Law Review
In the hundreds of cases reviewed for this survey, there were few earthshaking decisions. DNA evidence has arrived in Georgia, and the year and- a-day rule has left. Nevertheless, there are more noteworthy cases than can be adequately addressed in this survey. There are plenty of pitfalls for the unwary. In fact the most notable trend is the ever-increasing number of challenges to former counsel. Prosecutors, defense counsel, and courts are well-advised to use the Checklist for Unified Appeals as a guide in any criminal case.
Due to the significance of the Checklist for Unified Appeal, the author uses a …
Guilt: Henry Friendly Meets The Maharal Of Prague, Irene Merker Rosenberg, Yale L. Rosenberg
Guilt: Henry Friendly Meets The Maharal Of Prague, Irene Merker Rosenberg, Yale L. Rosenberg
Michigan Law Review
So while the overnight deliberation rule is at least partially bound up with the question of reliability and relates to the judicial process itself, the broader and more fundamental issue raised by this law is whether we should free the guilty to preserve a value that we deem necessary to proper working of the criminal justice process, regardless of the culpability of individual defendants. To this Judge Friendly's answer is generally no, 113 and the MaHaRaL's is yes.
The Breath Of The Unfee'd Lawyer: Statutory Fee Limitations And Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel In Capital Litigation, Albert L. Vreeland Ii
The Breath Of The Unfee'd Lawyer: Statutory Fee Limitations And Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel In Capital Litigation, Albert L. Vreeland Ii
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that fee limitations deprive indigent defendants of their right to effective assistance of counsel. Part I of this Note reviews state court decisions that address Sixth Amendment challenges to fee limitations, yet fail to address the broader concerns about the appointed counsel system. Part II considers the inherent disincentives and burdens fee limitations impose on attorneys and suggests that the limits threaten the indigent accused's right to effective assistance of counsel. A comparison of the fee limitations and the time required to prepare and try a capital case reveals the gross inadequacy of statutory fee provisions. In …
Suicide And Justice, Arthur J. Jacobson
Mccleskey V. Zant 111 S. Ct. 1454 (1991)
Mccleskey V. Zant 111 S. Ct. 1454 (1991)
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Arizona V. Fulminante 111 S. Ct. 1246, (1991)
Arizona V. Fulminante 111 S. Ct. 1246, (1991)
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Litigating The "Vileness" Factor In Virginia, Victor A. Lago
Litigating The "Vileness" Factor In Virginia, Victor A. Lago
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Coleman V. Thompson 111 S. Ct. 2546 (1991)
Coleman V. Thompson 111 S. Ct. 2546 (1991)
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Ford V. Georgia 111 S. Ct. 850 (1991)
Lankford V. Idaho 111 S. Ct. 1723 (1991)
Lankford V. Idaho 111 S. Ct. 1723 (1991)
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Yates V. Evatt 111 S. Ct. 1884 (1991)
Quesinberry V. Commonwealth 241 Va. 364,402 S.E.2d 218 (1991)
Quesinberry V. Commonwealth 241 Va. 364,402 S.E.2d 218 (1991)
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
The Virginia Supreme Court And Thirteen Years Of Death Sentence Review, Anne E. Mcinerney
The Virginia Supreme Court And Thirteen Years Of Death Sentence Review, Anne E. Mcinerney
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Comment On Edwards: Ward Edwards And The New Bayesian Software, David T. Wasserman
Comment On Edwards: Ward Edwards And The New Bayesian Software, David T. Wasserman
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Influence Diagrams, Bayesian Imperialism, And The Collins Case: An Appeal To Reason, Ward Edwards
Influence Diagrams, Bayesian Imperialism, And The Collins Case: An Appeal To Reason, Ward Edwards
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Telling Tales In Court: Trial Procedure And The Story Model, Richard O. Lempert
Telling Tales In Court: Trial Procedure And The Story Model, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
There are three ways in which stories may figure prominently at trials. First, litigants may tell stories to jurors. Not only is there some social science evidence that this happens, but trial lawyers have an instinctive sense that this is what they do. Ask a litigator to describe a current case and she is likely to reply, "Our story is ... " Second, jurors may try to make sense of the evidence they receive by fitting it to some story pattern. If so, the process is likely to feed back on itself. That is, jurors are likely to build a …
Expert-Novice Differences And Implications For Choice Of Bench Versus Jury Trial, Anne W. Martin
Expert-Novice Differences And Implications For Choice Of Bench Versus Jury Trial, Anne W. Martin
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Missing Evidence, Dale A. Nance
Distribution Of Damages In Car Accidents Through The Use Of Neural Networks, Lothar Philipps
Distribution Of Damages In Car Accidents Through The Use Of Neural Networks, Lothar Philipps
Cardozo Law Review
After a traffic accident the damage has to be fairly divided among the parties involved, and a ratio has to be determined. There are many precedents for this, and judges have developed catalogues suggesting ratios for common types of accidents.
The problem that "every case is different," however, remains. Many cases have familiar aspects, but also unfamiliar ones. Even if a case is composed of several familiar aspects with established ratios, the question remains as to how these are to be figured into one ratio. The first thought would be to invent a mathematical formula, but such formulae are rigid …
The Admissibility Of Dna Testing, D. H. Kaye
Some Caveats Concerning Dna As Criminal Identification Evidence: With Thanks To The Reverend Bayes, Richard Lempert
Some Caveats Concerning Dna As Criminal Identification Evidence: With Thanks To The Reverend Bayes, Richard Lempert
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
What Dna “Fingerprinting” Can Teach The Law About The Rest Of Forensic Science, Michael J. Saks, Jonathan J. Koehler
What Dna “Fingerprinting” Can Teach The Law About The Rest Of Forensic Science, Michael J. Saks, Jonathan J. Koehler
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Fall And Rise Of The Criminal Contingent Fee, Peter Lushing
The Fall And Rise Of The Criminal Contingent Fee, Peter Lushing
Articles
The article argues that the ban on contingent fees for criminal defense attorneys, established by the American Bar Association in 1969, is outdated and should be repealed. It contends that the ban is rooted in historical prejudice and unfounded concerns about conflicts of interest, rather than empirical evidence. The author suggests that the Supreme Court's 1989 decision implicitly approving contingent fees in certain criminal cases presents an opportunity to reconsider this prohibition. Repealing the ban could benefit middle-class defendants and allow for regulation and data collection to address potential issues.
Mandatory Hiv Testing Of Rape Defendants: Constitutional Rights Are Sacrificed In A Vain Attempt To Assist The Victim, Raymond S. Franks
Mandatory Hiv Testing Of Rape Defendants: Constitutional Rights Are Sacrificed In A Vain Attempt To Assist The Victim, Raymond S. Franks
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Fourth Amendment And Its Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
The Fourth Amendment And Its Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
Articles
"The history of liberty," Justice Felix Frankfurter once noted, "has largely been the history of observance of procedural safeguards" and "the history of the destruction of liberty," Professor Anthony Amsterdam has added, "has largely been the history of the relaxation of those safeguards in the face of plausible sounding governmental claims of a need to deal with widely frightening and emotion freighted threats to the good order of society." These plausible-sounding government claims are being heard today -and they are putting enormous pressure on the Fourth Amendment, the constitutional provision that protects "the right of the people to be secure …
In The Aftermath Of Soering, Is Interstate Extradition To Virginia Illegal?
In The Aftermath Of Soering, Is Interstate Extradition To Virginia Illegal?
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Tribe V. Mancha, No. 90-C-1355, 91-Ap-03 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Aug. 29, 1991), Blackfeet Appellate Court
Tribe V. Mancha, No. 90-C-1355, 91-Ap-03 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Aug. 29, 1991), Blackfeet Appellate Court
Court Decisions
The Court of Appeals for the Blackfeet Indian Reservation dismissed the case against the defendant because he was denied his right to a speedy trial by jury. The Court found that the standard timeframe accepted by most courts for a speedy trial is 180 days, and Mancha was brought to trial after 284 days. The Court held that this delay in the trial date violated the defendant’s rights as defined in Rule 58, Chapter 9 of the Blackfeet Law and Order Code. The Court further ordered that the trial court implement a procedure at arraignment for documenting waiver of jury …
Tribe V. Mancha, No. 90-C-1355, 91-Ap-03 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Aug. 29, 1991)., Blackfeet Appellate Court
Tribe V. Mancha, No. 90-C-1355, 91-Ap-03 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Aug. 29, 1991)., Blackfeet Appellate Court
Court Decisions
The Court of Appeals for the Blackfeet Indian Reservation dismissed the case against the defendant because he was denied his right to a speedy trial by jury. The Court found that the standard timeframe accepted by most courts for a speedy trial is 180 days, and Mancha was brought to trial after 284 days. The Court held that this delay in the trial date violated the defendant’s rights as defined in Rule 58, Chapter 9 of the Blackfeet Law and Order Code. The Court further ordered that the trial court implement a procedure at arraignment for documenting waiver of jury …
The Jurisdiction To Do Justice: Florida's Jury Override And The State Constitution, Michael Mello
The Jurisdiction To Do Justice: Florida's Jury Override And The State Constitution, Michael Mello
Florida State University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Minnick V. Mississippi: Additional Protection For The Criminal Defendant, Gabe Hotard Jr.
Minnick V. Mississippi: Additional Protection For The Criminal Defendant, Gabe Hotard Jr.
Mercer Law Review
In Minnick v. Mississippi, the United States Supreme Court held that when counsel is requested by an accused in custody, interrogation of the accused must cease, and officials may not re-initiate interrogation without counsel present, whether or not the accused has consulted with his attorney. The privilege against self-incrimination as guaranteed by the fifth amendment and as developed into its modern form nearly a quarter-century ago in Miranda v. Arizona provided the backbone of the Supreme Court's decision. The Court's holding clarifies the previously unclear issue of whether counsel's presence on behalf of an accused is required at any interrogation …