Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Derivative Evidence Under Mcnabb-Mallory

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Unconstitutional Judicial Sentences

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Presence Of Accused At Trial

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law And Procedure -- 1963 Tennessee Survey, Robert E. Kendrick

Vanderbilt Law Review

1. Homicide. A number of years ago the Tennessee Supreme Court adopted the common law principle that one is justified in taking life in defense of his habitation when actually or apparently necessary to repel an attempt by another to enter forcibly or violently under circumstances creating a reasonable apprehension that the assailant's design is imminently to commit a felony therein or to assault or offer personal violence or inflict personal injury on an inmate so that there are reasonable grounds for concluding that life is endangered or great bodily harm is threatened thereby.'

Flippen v. State, a homicide case, …

The Scope Of Permissible Cross-Examination Of A Party Litigant Or Defendant In A Jury Trial In West Virginia, Lee Ames Luce

West Virginia Law Review

Two fundamental restrictions limit the permissible scope of the cross-examination of a party litigant or defendant in a jury trial. One is the evidentiary restriction limiting cross-examination to those matters discussed in chief, and the second is the constitutional privilege against compulsory self-incrimination. The purpose of this note is to examine the development and application of these restrictions in West Virginia jurisprudence.

Criminal Law--Declaration Of Mistrial Because Of Absence Of Defendant, John Ralph Lukens

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Criminal Procedure-Transfer For Trial Under Rule 21(B), F. David Trickey

Michigan Law Review

Defendant, a Delaware corporation, was indicted in the Eastern District of Illinois for violations of the Sherman Act. Proceeding under Rule 21(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure defendant moved to transfer the trial to the District of Minnesota, where its principal business offices were located. The parties stipulated that the alleged offenses occurred in both Illinois and Minnesota and submitted affidavits, briefs, and oral argument on the transfer motion to petitioner, the district court judge. While evaluating numerous other factors relevant to the transfer motion, the district court gave some weight to the contention of government counsel that …

Constitutional Law-Federal Criminal Procedure-Right To Counsel Under Section 2255 Of The Judicial Code, Gerald J. Laba

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner, seeking to attack a conviction for illegal possession of narcotics, was granted leave to sue in form a pauperis under 28 U.S.C. section 2255, but his request that counsel be appointed for him was denied. Petitioner's section 2255 motion to vacate judgment was denied. Petitioner then entered a second section 2255 petition alleging basically the same errors but adding that the court had erred in not appointing counsel for his first petition. The second motion was denied without a hearing on the ground that it was "the second or successive motion for similar relief .... " Petitioner appealed in …

Conflict Of Laws--Appointment Of A Valid Agent For Service Of Process, William Walter Smith

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Criminal Procedure-Subpoena Of Nonresident Citizen As Witness Before Grand Jury, Andre A. Schwartz

Michigan Law Review

Defendant, a nonresident citizen of the United States, was subpoenaed by a federal district court to appear before a grand jury investigating alleged fraud in the procurement of government contracts. Defendant having failed to appear, the district court issued an order directing him to show cause why he should not be held in contempt. On appeal from a judgment holding defendant in contempt, held, reversed, one judge dissenting in part. The power of a federal district court to subpoena a nonresident citizen is limited to the actual trial of a criminal action. United States v. Thompson, 319 F.2d …

Criminal Law-Reiterated Contempt Of Court, Robert C. Bonges

Michigan Law Review

The defendant was found guilty of criminal contempt of court in a civil proceeding for giving "don't remember" answers, after having been granted immunity from prosecution, to questions concerning his activities, asked during a grand jury investigation of an attempted homicide. For his refusal to testify, the defendant was given the maximum penalty provided for criminal contempt under the applicable statute. After paying the fine and serving the sentence, the defendant was brought before the same grand jury thirty-five days later and was asked the same questions. The defendant repeated the "don't remember" answers and was again fined and incarcerated. …

Criminal Justice, Robert F. Kennedy

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Next In Federal Criminal Rules?, Walter E. Hoffman

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Defendant's Vested Right In A Void Judgment

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Convict's Right To Speedy Trial On A Pending Indictment

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reliable Informers And Corroboration

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Police Refusal Of A Blood Test As Suppression Of Evidence

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Use Of Coerced Confessions In State Courts, J. A. Spanogle

Vanderbilt Law Review

It is now well settled that involuntary confessions must be excluded from evidence in all criminal trials in state courts. It has been difficult, however, to distinguish a voluntary confession from an involuntary one, because the term "involuntary" is not well defined. This lack of definition, which creates great problems for state trial and appellate courts in attempting to apply the rule to individual cases, has, in turn, stemmed from a lack of understanding of the reasons for excluding involuntary confessions. The United States Supreme Court has handed down thirty-four coerced confession cases, holding confessions admissible in some factual situations …

Federal Criminal Procedure-Collateral Relief Under 28 U.S.C. Section 2255- Discretion Of Sentencing Court To Dismiss Successive Application Without Hearing, Richard B. Rogers

Michigan Law Review

Prisoner, sentenced by a United States district court, filed two successive motions to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. section 2255, which provides for a compulsory motion procedure for federal prisoners in lieu of habeas corpus. Under this section, a prisoner is required to petition the court which sentenced him in order to test the legality of his detention. The motion must be given a prompt hearing, "unless the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief. .. " If a successive motion is filed for "similar relief" the …

Lawful Objects Of Search And Seizure, Joseph Wool

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Use Of The Administrative Summons In Federal Tax Investigations, James D. Burroughs

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

The Use Of Public Opinion Polls In Continuance And Venue Hearings, Edward F. Sherman

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Courts are becoming increasingly receptive to the admission of the results of public opinion polls to show community attitudes and prejudgments as to certain criminal cases in which continuances or changes of venue are sought by the defendants. Mr. Sherman concludes that polls may provide a degree of evidentiary certainty now lacking, but he warns that polls can also be tricky unless properly conducted and interpreted.

Misconduct Of Judges And Attorneys During Trial: Informal Sanctions, Charles W. Ehrhardt

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Power To Comment On The Issue Of Guilt: Trial By Jury Or Trial By Judge, Thomas F. Schilpp

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law—Inculpatory Statements Given Before Arraignment Where Consultation With Counsel Refused, Now Inadmissable., James B. Denman

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Felony-Murder - Surviving Co-Felons Are Punishable For First Degree Murder Under California Penal Code Section 189 For The Killing Of A Confederate By The Owner Of The Store Which They Were Robbing (People V. Hand, Cal. 1963), Robert C. Baxley

San Diego Law Review

In the process of executing a planned robbery of a store, one of four robbers was killed by the owner. The store had been previously robbed and the owner was waiting for such a recurrence. Held, on demurrer to the indictment, the surviving felons were punishable for first degree murder because the legislature intended this fact situation to be within the purview of section 189 and because of a strong public policy as a deterrent to violent felonies. People v. Hand, Crim. No. 5471, Super. Ct., San Diego (July 22, 1963).

In Search Of Criminology. By Leon Radzinowicz, William B. Enright

San Diego Law Review

At the 1963 California State Bar Convention, Chief Justice Phil S. Gibson, in the course of an address to the profession, stated: "History will judge the quality of a civilization by the manner in which it enforces its criminal laws." This remark by the Chief Justice indicates the larger problem to which the author of the new book In Search of Criminology has addressed himself.

Criminal Law--Insanity And Criminal Responsibility--The Status Of The M'Naughten Plus Irresistible Impulse Test, John Dixon Jr.

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure--Right To Transcript--In Forma Pauperis Appeal, Marshall Loy

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Other Answers: Search And Seizure, Coerced Confession And Criminal Trial In Scotland, Paul Hardin Iii

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.