Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Every Mother's Son: Humanizing The Defendant, Lisbeth Potts

Mercer Law Review

When the jury panel walks into the courtroom, the first thing they do with "bull's eye" accuracy is zero in on your client. "He must be guilty. Why else would I have to be here? If he wasn't guilty, he wouldn't be here." Those are the thoughts flashing through most of their minds., This is typically the situation, whether the defendant has been charged with a minor offense or a heinous crime.

Political Trials, Ephraim Margolin

Mercer Law Review

In Political Criminal Trials, John Sink distinguished between cases in which the defendant admits the deeds, but invokes political reasons as a justification, and cases in which the prosecution proceeds against suspects for political reasons of its own. Each category of case is tried differently. Each compels a different approach to the handling of the media.

There Is No Such Thing As A Free Question: Examining The Hidden Costs Of Trial Advocacy, Michelle Schieber

Mercer Law Review

Readers of Robert H. Klonoff and Paul L. Colby's new book on trial tactics might well be surprised by the authors' frequent references to fictional works such as Presumed Innocent and Perry Mason. A reader might even go so far as to conclude that the text which he has undertaken to peruse is somewhat radical. But if the reader also assumes that the authors' quirky approach has resulted in a book without merit, then he would be very wrong indeed.

A Crisis Of Legality In The Criminal Law? Reflections On The Rule Of Law, Francis A. Allen

Mercer Law Review

The Carl Vinson Lecture

The notion of the Rule of Law dates from the beginnings of political thought in the western world. In many ways it has had a curious career, for the concept has inspired hyperbole and bombast while, at the same time, generating some of our most sensitive meditations on the nature of law and the relation of individual rights to the exercise of political power and authority.

Calling Your Attention To The Direct Examination: How To Avoid The What Happened Next Question, Christina L. Hunt

Mercer Law Review

When presenting a direct examination, whether it'is the testimony of your client or of another witness, you must remember one thing-prepare your case. Without preparation, a number of consequences inevitably follow:

1. you will definitely lose your client's case;
2. your client will call you every day and drive you insane;
3. your client will then proceed to the penitentiary;
4. he will say unflattering things' about you (and you will deserve it);
5. you will lose potential new clients;
6. he will file habeas corpus papers pro se;
7. he also will sue you for millions of dollars, and, he will do that pro …

The Art Of Impeachment, J. Vincent Aprile Ii

Mercer Law Review

Impeachment is more than a cross-examination technique; impeachment is often a criminal defense lawyer's only weapon against the prosecution's case-in-chief. Impeachment is not a trial tactic or strategy that often can be extemporaneously employed to undermine a prosecution witness's believability. When impeachment, regardless of the mode or technique, is a significant part of the defense strategy, defense counsel must begin to build the context of the impeachment, at the latest, during voir dire and, at the earliest, no later than pretrial motion practice.

Holland V. Illinois: The Supreme Court Narrows The Scope Of Protection Against Discriminatory Jury Selection Procedures, Jefferson Edward Howeth

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ii. Civil And Crimnal Procedure

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Aspects Of Interaction Between The Torah Law, The King’S Law, And The Noahide Law In Jewish Criminal Law, Arnold N. Enker

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Challenging Public Investigative Reports: How To Fight The Hearsay Exception, Steven P. Grossman, Stephen J. Shapiro

All Faculty Scholarship

This paper discusses how attorneys can argue against having government and public reports admitted into evidence at trial that would be damaging to their client. When this paper was done, such reports were admitted via Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8)(C). The authors argue that it is possible to challenge admission of factual findings in public reports despite various court decisions which make this difficult.

Self-Defense As A Justification For Punishment, George P. Fletcher

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survey Of Recent Developments In Indiana Criminal Law And Procedure, Bruce G. Berner, David E. Vandercoy

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Breaking The Silence: Should Jurors Be Allowed To Question Witnesses During Trial?, Jeffrey S. Berkowitz

Vanderbilt Law Review

The above line of questioning destroyed the defendant's chance of being acquitted. Surprisingly, however, the questions that sealed the defendant's fate were raised by a juror after the prosecutor had failed to elicit the devastating facts.'

The notion of allowing jurors to question witnesses during a trial is not a novel one, but the governmental entities responsible for supervising the court system never have encouraged the practice.' As a result, juror questioning is not widespread.' This situation, however, may be changing. During 1989 judges in at least thirty states, including New York, California, and Connecticut, agreed to conduct the first …

Be All You Can Be (Without The Protection Of The Constitution), Keith M. Harrison

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] “Despite the generous inclusion by President Reagan of the many soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines in the concept of "the people" of this republic, it is not altogether dear whether one whose status has changed from ordinary "citizen" to "a member of the armed forces" can legitimately claim any of the constitutional protections of citizenship until he or she is no longer a member of the armed forces. In the course of this nation's history the Supreme Court has denied some or all of the protection of the Constitution to many groups of people, including African-Americans, 2 women,3 Native …

To See Or Not To See The Defendant: Expanding The Use Of Florida's Special Procedures For Taking The Testimony Of Witnesses, Glenn F. Lang

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fourth, Fifth, And Sixth Amendments, William E. Hellerstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Alabama V. White: Anonymous Tip Held Sufficient Basis For Investigatory Stop Under Fourth Amendment, 24 J. Marshall L. Rev. 909 (1991), Martin K. Berks

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Jencks Act - Availability Of Jencks Material At Post-Trial Hearings - Third Circuit Extends Jencks Act To Sentencing Hearings, Nataly A. Harker

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Evaluating The Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule: The Problem Of Police Compliance With The Law, William C. Heffernan, Richard W. Lovely

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Part I of this article reviews background matters bearing on our research - in particular, we discuss the Court's framework for analyzing exclusion as a deterrent safeguard, the research questions that need to be raised within that framework, and the research strategy we adopted in light of the Court's approach to exclusion. Part II analyzes our findings on police knowledge of the rules of search and seizure. Part III analyzes our findings on officers' willingness to obey the law. Part IV evaluates our findings in light of policy questions concerning the exclusionary rule. We consider whether the Court should retain …

Successful Shadowboxing: The Art Of Impeaching Hearsay Declarants, The Honorable Anthony M. Brannon

Campbell Law Review

Using the nine modes of impeachment recognized by the common law, I will examine some of the possibilities for impeaching hearsay declarants. As I explore each mode, I will discuss whether extrinsic, as well as intrinsic, evidence may be used to impeach the hearsay evidence.

James V. Illinois: Wither The Exclusionary Rule - Not Quite Yet, 24 J. Marshall L. Rev. 493 (1991), David H. Norris

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Videotaped Reenactments In Civil Trials: Protecting Probative Evidence From The Trial Judge's Unbridled Discretion, 24 J. Marshall L. Rev. 433 (1991), Elizabeth A. Savage

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Horton V. California: The Plain View Doctrine Loses Its Inadvertency, 24 J. Marshall L. Rev. 891 (1991), John A. Mack

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Misconduct During Jury Deliberations, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The author considers the two principal types of improper judicial behavior that may occur during the jury deliberation process. Judicial conduct that attempts to place undue pressure on a jury to reach a verdict may include verdict-urging instructions, threats and intimidation, and inquiry into the numerical division of the jury on the merits of the verdict. Judicial participation in private, ex parte communications with jurors may also subvert orderly trial procedure and undermine the impartiality of the jury. Neither kind of judicial conduct may be allowed to compel a verdict from a jury.

Federal Habeas Review Of New York Convictions: Relieving The Tensions, Roger J. Miner '56

Bar Associations

No abstract provided.

Crime And Punishment In The Federal Courts, Roger J. Miner '56

Criminal Law

No abstract provided.

New York Law School — Final Examinations, Roger J. Miner '56

New York Law School Events and Publications

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure - Match-Game 1990'S: The Admissibility Of Dna Profiling - State V. Pennington, W. Anthony Purcell

Campbell Law Review

This Note discusses the nature, history, and effect of DNA profiling and supports the Pennington court's holding as the correct approach. Although the court adopted the majority view, and most likely the correct view, this area of law still remains in a state of confusion.