Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (215)
- Criminal Law (190)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (51)
- Evidence (36)
- Law and Society (31)
-
- Courts (28)
- Jurisprudence (27)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (27)
- Fourth Amendment (26)
- Legal History (25)
- Legislation (18)
- Human Rights Law (17)
- Judges (17)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (15)
- First Amendment (14)
- Litigation (14)
- Immigration Law (13)
- Juvenile Law (12)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (12)
- Supreme Court of the United States (12)
- Civil Law (11)
- International Law (11)
- State and Local Government Law (11)
- Administrative Law (10)
- Legal Profession (10)
- Family Law (9)
- Law and Gender (9)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (9)
- Institution
-
- BLR (67)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (39)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (22)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (20)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (12)
-
- William & Mary Law School (10)
- American University Washington College of Law (7)
- Seattle University School of Law (7)
- Barry University School of Law (5)
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law (3)
- Georgia State University College of Law (3)
- New York Law School (3)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (3)
- University of San Diego (3)
- Georgetown University Law Center (2)
- University of Georgia School of Law (2)
- West Virginia University (2)
- Claremont Colleges (1)
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (1)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (1)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (1)
- Pepperdine University (1)
- San Jose State University (1)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (1)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (1)
- University of Maine School of Law (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of Washington School of Law (1)
- Washington University in St. Louis (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- ExpressO (64)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (38)
- Touro Law Review (20)
- Cardozo Law Review (13)
- Supreme Court Case Files (12)
-
- Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals (7)
- Articles (6)
- Seattle University Law Review (6)
- Faculty Scholarship (5)
- Faculty Publications (4)
- Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press (3)
- Cardozo Law Review de•novo (3)
- Georgia State University Law Review (3)
- University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series (3)
- William & Mary Law Review (3)
- Articles & Chapters (2)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (2)
- Popular Media (2)
- Scholarly Works (2)
- The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Working Paper Series (2)
- West Virginia Law Review (2)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (2)
- CMC Senior Theses (1)
- Catholic University Law Review (1)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (1)
- Faculty Publications, School of Management (1)
- George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series (1)
- Indiana Law Journal (1)
- Journal Articles (1)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 60 of 224
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
Panel 4: Criminal Procedure And Affirmative Action
Panel 4: Criminal Procedure And Affirmative Action
Georgia State University Law Review
Moderator: Lauren Sudeall
Panelists: Dan Epps, Gail Heriot, and Corinna Lain
Custodial Compulsion, Kyron J. Huigens
Custodial Compulsion, Kyron J. Huigens
Articles
In cases that fall under Miranda v Arizona, police interrogators not only give a suspect reasons to confess; they also suggest that the suspect ought to confess. In doing so, interrogators effectively invoke the Wigmorean duty of a citizen to produce any evidence he has in his possession, including his own confession. That is, they invoke the duty against which the Self Incrimination Clause stands, so that the clause is applicable to police interrogations, and is violated where it is not waived. This means that “a Miranda violation” is a violation of the Self Incrimination Clause in the field, just …
Harmless Constitutional Error: How A Minor Doctrine Meant To Improve Judicial Efficiency Is Eroding America's Founding Ideals, Ross C. Reggio
Harmless Constitutional Error: How A Minor Doctrine Meant To Improve Judicial Efficiency Is Eroding America's Founding Ideals, Ross C. Reggio
CMC Senior Theses
The United States Constitution had been in existence for almost two hundred years before the Supreme Court decided that some violations of constitutional rights may be too insignificant to warrant remedial action. Known as "harmless error," this statutory doctrine allows a court to affirm a conviction when a mere technicality or minor defect did not affect the defendant's substantial rights. The doctrine aims to promote judicial efficiency and judgment finality. The Court first applied harmless error to constitutional violations by shifting the statutory test away from the error's effect on substantial rights to its impact on the jury's verdict. Over …
Where The Constitution Falls Short: Confession Admissibility And Police Regulation, Courtney E. Lewis
Where The Constitution Falls Short: Confession Admissibility And Police Regulation, Courtney E. Lewis
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
A confession presented at trial is one of the most damning pieces of evidence against a criminal defendant, which means that the rules governing its admissibility are critical. At the outset of confession admissibility in the United States, the judiciary focused on a confession’s truthfulness. Culminating in the landmark case Miranda v. Arizona, judicial concern with the reliability of confessions shifted away from whether a confession was true and towards curtailing unconstitutional police misconduct. Post-hoc constitutionality review, however, is arguably inappropriate. Such review is inappropriate largely because the reviewing court must find that the confession was voluntary only by …
Police Ignorance And Mistake Of Law Under The Fourth Amendment, Eang L. Ngov
Police Ignorance And Mistake Of Law Under The Fourth Amendment, Eang L. Ngov
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Capital-Sentencing Law And The New Conservative Court, Scott W. Howe
Capital-Sentencing Law And The New Conservative Court, Scott W. Howe
Cardozo Law Review de•novo
With the Supreme Court now dominated by a solidly conservative majority, recent, well-grounded hopes for prompt judicial abolition of the death penalty have vanished. Furthermore, existing Eighth Amendment doctrines that limit the death penalty could be in jeopardy. Historically, many advocates for abolition have criticized these doctrines. They claim that the Eighth Amendment prohibition on Cruel and Unusual Punishments requires “consistency” in capital selection and that current capital-sentencing doctrines do not satisfy—and sometimes conflict with— this requirement. However, these advocates failed to anticipate the need to defend these doctrines should judicial abolition become an impossibility and the rolling-back of current …
The Unintended Consequences Of California Proposition 47: Reducing Law Enforcement’S Ability To Solve Serious, Violent Crimes, Shelby Kail
Pepperdine Law Review
For many years, DNA databases have helped solve countless serious, violent crimes by connecting low-level offenders to unsolved crimes. Because the passage of Proposition 47 reduced several low-level crimes to misdemeanors, which do not qualify for DNA sample collection, Proposition 47 has severely limited law enforcement’s ability to solve serious, violent crimes through California’s DNA database and reliable DNA evidence. This powerful law enforcement tool must be preserved to prevent additional crimes from being committed, to exonerate the innocent, and to provide victims with closure through conviction of their assailants or offenders. Proposition 47’s unintended consequences have led to devastating …
A Promise Unfulfilled: Challenges To Georgia’S Death Penalty Statute Post-Furman, William Cody Newsome
A Promise Unfulfilled: Challenges To Georgia’S Death Penalty Statute Post-Furman, William Cody Newsome
Georgia State University Law Review
In Furman v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Furman’s counsel. Three Justices agreed that Georgia law, as applied, was arbitrary and potentially discriminatory. Moreover, one Justice challenged the value of the death penalty and doubted it served any of the alleged purposes for which it was employed.
Although many challenges subsequent to Furman have been raised and arguably resolved by the Court, the underlying challenges raised by Furman appear to remain prevalent with the Court. Justice Breyer recently echoed the concurring opinions of Furman in his dissenting opinion from Glossip v. Gross, when he stated: “In …
A Contextual Approach To Harmless Error Review, Justin Murray
A Contextual Approach To Harmless Error Review, Justin Murray
Articles & Chapters
Harmless error review is profoundly important, but arguably broken, in the form that courts currently employ it in criminal cases. One significant reason for this brokenness lies in the dissonance between the reductionism of modern harmless error methodology and the diverse normative ambitions of criminal procedure. Nearly all harmless error rules used by courts today focus exclusively on whether the procedural error under review affected the result of a judicial proceeding. I refer to these rules as “result-based harmlesserror review.” The singular preoccupation of result-based harmless error review with the outputs of criminal processes stands in marked contrast with criminal …
When The Police Get The Law Wrong: How Heien V. North Carolina Further Erodes The Fourth Amendment, Vivan M. Rivera
When The Police Get The Law Wrong: How Heien V. North Carolina Further Erodes The Fourth Amendment, Vivan M. Rivera
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Criminal Innovation And The Warrant Requirement: Reconsidering The Rights-Police Efficiency Trade-Off, Tonja Jacobi, Jonah Kind
Criminal Innovation And The Warrant Requirement: Reconsidering The Rights-Police Efficiency Trade-Off, Tonja Jacobi, Jonah Kind
William & Mary Law Review
It is routinely assumed that there is a trade-off between police efficiency and the warrant requirement. But existing analysis ignores the interaction between law-enforcement investigative practices and criminal innovation. Narrowing the definition of a search or otherwise limiting the requirement for a warrant gives criminals greater incentive to innovate to avoid detection. With limited resources to develop countermeasures, law enforcement officers will often be just as effective at capturing criminals when facing higher Fourth Amendment hurdles. We provide a game-theoretic model that shows that when law-enforcement investigation and criminal innovation are considered in a dynamic context, the police efficiency rationale …
The Conversational Consent Search: How “Quick Look” And Other Similar Searches Have Eroded Our Constitutional Rights, Alexander A. Mikhalevsky
The Conversational Consent Search: How “Quick Look” And Other Similar Searches Have Eroded Our Constitutional Rights, Alexander A. Mikhalevsky
Georgia State University Law Review
One area in which law enforcement agencies have stretched constitutional limits concerns the scope of a suspect’s consent to search his or her vehicle. Police forces across the country have tested the limits of consent by asking vague, conversational questions to suspects with the goal of obtaining a suspect’s consent to search, even though that individual may not want to allow the search or may not know that he or she has the right to deny consent.
Conversational phrases like “Can I take a quick look?” or “Can I take a quick look around?” have “emerg[ed] as . . . …
Windsor Beyond Marriage: Due Process, Equality & Undocumented Immigration, Anthony O'Rourke
Windsor Beyond Marriage: Due Process, Equality & Undocumented Immigration, Anthony O'Rourke
William & Mary Law Review
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Windsor, invalidating part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, presents a significant interpretive challenge. Early commentators have criticized the majority opinion’s lack of analytical rigor, and expressed doubt that Windsor can serve as a meaningful precedent with respect to constitutional questions outside the area of same-sex marriage. This Article offers a more rehabilitative reading of Windsor and shows how the decision can be used to analyze a significant constitutional question concerning the use of state criminal procedure to regulate immigration.
From Windsor’s holding, the Article distills two concrete doctrinal propositions …
Criminal Court, New York County, People V. Dejesus, Justin Goldberg
Criminal Court, New York County, People V. Dejesus, Justin Goldberg
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Buari, Matthew Moisan
Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Buari, Matthew Moisan
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Family Court, Queens County, In Re German F. And Hector R., Angelique Hermanowski
Family Court, Queens County, In Re German F. And Hector R., Angelique Hermanowski
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court, Queens County, People V. Tam, Elaine Yang
Supreme Court, Queens County, People V. Tam, Elaine Yang
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Lethal Injection And The Right Of Access: The Intersection Of The Eighth And First Amendments, Timothy F. Brown
Lethal Injection And The Right Of Access: The Intersection Of The Eighth And First Amendments, Timothy F. Brown
Faculty Publications, School of Management
The Spring and Summer of 2014 have witnessed renewed debate on the constitutionality of the death penalty after a series of high profile legal battles concerning access to lethal injection protocols and subsequent questionable executions. Due to shortages in the drugs traditionally used for the lethal injection, States have changed their lethal injection protocols to shield information from both the prisoners and the public. Citing public safety concerns, the States refuse to release information concerning the procurement of the drugs to the public. Such obstruction hinders the public’s ability to determine the cruelty of the punishment imposed and creates the …
The Anomaly Of Entrapment, Jessica A. Roth
The Anomaly Of Entrapment, Jessica A. Roth
Articles
Now in our second decade after 9/11, we are firmly in the prevention era of law enforcement. Faced with the unacceptable consequences of identifying threats too late, government agents are moving aggressively to identify potential terrorists before they strike. Undercover agents and confidential informants necessarily play a large role in such efforts. As a result of such operations, we have seen a number of cases brought to trial in the federal courts in which defendants have asserted the entrapment defense. To date, the defense has not succeeded. However, as a consequence of these cases, the United States Supreme Court may …
The Voice Of Reason—Why Recent Judicial Interpretations Of The Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act’S Restrictions On Habeas Corpus Are Wrong, Judith L. Ritter
The Voice Of Reason—Why Recent Judicial Interpretations Of The Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act’S Restrictions On Habeas Corpus Are Wrong, Judith L. Ritter
Seattle University Law Review
By filing a petition for a federal writ of habeas corpus, a prisoner initiates a legal proceeding collateral to the direct appeals process. Federal statutes set forth the procedure and parameters of habeas corpus review. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) first signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, included significant cut-backs in the availability of federal writs of habeas corpus. This was by congressional design. Yet, despite the dire predictions, for most of the first decade of AEDPA’s reign, the door to habeas relief remained open. More recently, however, the Supreme Court reinterpreted a key portion …
The Dog Days Of Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Kit Kinports
The Dog Days Of Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Kit Kinports
NULR Online
No abstract provided.
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens
Seattle University Law Review
This survey is intended to serve as a resource to which Washington lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, and others can turn as an authoritative starting point for researching Washington search and seizure law. In order to be useful as a research tool, this Survey requires periodic updates to address new cases interpreting the Washington constitution and the U.S. Constitution and to reflect the current state of the law. Many of these cases involve the Washington State Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Washington constitution. Also, as the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to examine Fourth Amendment search and seizure jurisprudence, its …
The Sanctity Of The Attorney-Client Relationship – Undermined By The Federal Interpretation Of The Right To Counsel - People V. Borukhova, Tara Laterza
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Cumulative Approach To Ineffective Assistance: New York’S Requirement That Counsel’S Cumulative Efforts Amount To Meaningful Representation - People V. Bodden, Jan Lucas
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
What Are We Searching For? Conditions, Elements, And Requirements For A Valid “Searching Inquiry” In The State Of New York - People V. Crampe, Dean M. Villani
What Are We Searching For? Conditions, Elements, And Requirements For A Valid “Searching Inquiry” In The State Of New York - People V. Crampe, Dean M. Villani
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Flying Solo Without A License: The Right Of Pro Se Defendants To Crash And Burn - People V. Smith, Tiffany Frigenti
Flying Solo Without A License: The Right Of Pro Se Defendants To Crash And Burn - People V. Smith, Tiffany Frigenti
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Someone Call 911, Crawford Is Dying - People V. Duhs, Caroline Knoepffler
Someone Call 911, Crawford Is Dying - People V. Duhs, Caroline Knoepffler
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Sections 9, 10 And 11 Of The Canadian Charter, Steve Coughlan, Robert Currie
Sections 9, 10 And 11 Of The Canadian Charter, Steve Coughlan, Robert Currie
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
Section 9 of the Charter guarantees freedom from arbitrary detention, section 10 provides certain rights on arrest, and section 11 guarantees various rights to those charged with an offence. In this chapter the authors consider the aspects of these rights which have been authoritatively determined, as well as pointing to the areas which remain unsettled and discussing the areas of lingering controversy.
Testimonial Statements: The Death Of Dying Declarations? - People V. Clay, Sarah R. Gitomer
Testimonial Statements: The Death Of Dying Declarations? - People V. Clay, Sarah R. Gitomer
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Decline Of The Confrontation Clause In New York - People V. Encarnacion, Anthony Fasano
The Decline Of The Confrontation Clause In New York - People V. Encarnacion, Anthony Fasano
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.