Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Seattle University School of Law (223)
- University of Michigan Law School (61)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (55)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (42)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (24)
-
- University of Nebraska - Lincoln (17)
- UIC School of Law (14)
- Cornell University Law School (10)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (9)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (6)
- Pepperdine University (6)
- William & Mary Law School (6)
- Mitchell Hamline School of Law (5)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (5)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (5)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (4)
- University of Washington School of Law (4)
- Columbia Law School (3)
- Georgia State University College of Law (3)
- Mississippi Christian University School of Law (3)
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (3)
- University of Colorado Law School (3)
- University of Georgia School of Law (3)
- University of Maine School of Law (3)
- University of Miami Law School (3)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (3)
- Barry University School of Law (2)
- Cleveland State University (2)
- Emory University School of Law (2)
- Florida A&M University College of Law (2)
- Keyword
-
- Due process (51)
- Fourteenth Amendment (35)
- Fifth Amendment (28)
- Due Process (25)
- Constitution (24)
-
- Capital punishment sentencing (21)
- Supreme Court (21)
- Due Process Clause (18)
- Sixth Amendment (18)
- United States Supreme Court (18)
- Capital punishment (17)
- Federal (17)
- Law (16)
- Miranda v. Arizona (16)
- Equal protection (15)
- Evidence (15)
- New York (15)
- Police (15)
- Eighth Amendment (12)
- Fourteenth amendment (12)
- State (12)
- Death penalty (11)
- Defendant (11)
- Exclusionary rule (11)
- § 1 (11)
- 1990) (10)
- Criminal law (10)
- Criminal procedure (10)
- Dickerson v. United States (10)
- Self-incrimination (10)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (189)
- Michigan Law Review (51)
- Capital Defense Journal (33)
- Touro Law Review (32)
- Seattle Journal for Social Justice (25)
-
- Nebraska Journal on Advancing Justice (17)
- UIC Law Review (13)
- Articles (10)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (10)
- Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity (10)
- American Indian Law Journal (9)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (9)
- Cardozo Law Review (8)
- Faculty Scholarship (8)
- Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal (7)
- Supreme Court Case Files (7)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (7)
- Pepperdine Law Review (6)
- Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice (5)
- Faculty Works (5)
- Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy (5)
- Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice (5)
- Faculty Publications (4)
- Mitchell Hamline Law Journal of Public Policy and Practice (4)
- University of Cincinnati Law Review (4)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (3)
- MC Law Review (3)
- Maine Law Review (3)
- Other Faculty Publications (3)
- Publications (3)
- Publication Type
Articles 421 - 450 of 565
Full-Text Articles in Fourteenth Amendment
Miranda'S Mistake, William J. Stuntz
Miranda'S Mistake, William J. Stuntz
Michigan Law Review
The oddest thing about Miranda is its politics - a point reinforced by the decision in, and the reaction to, Dickerson v. United States. In Dickerson, the Supreme Court faced the question whether Miranda ought to be overturned, either directly or by permitting legislative overrides. The lawyers, the literature, and the Court split along right-left - or, in the Court's case, right-center - lines, with the right seeking to do away with Miranda's restrictions on police questioning, and the left (or center) seeking to maintain them. The split is familiar. Reactions to Miranda have always divided along ideological lines, with …
Separated At Birth But Siblings Nonetheless: Miranda And The Due Process Notice Cases, George C. Thomas Iii
Separated At Birth But Siblings Nonetheless: Miranda And The Due Process Notice Cases, George C. Thomas Iii
Michigan Law Review
Paraphrasing Justice Holmes, law is less about logic than experience. Courts and scholars have now had thirty-four years of experience with Miranda v. Arizona, including the Court's recent endorsement in Dickerson v. United States last Term. Looking back over this experience, it is plain that the Court has created a Miranda doctrine quite different from what it has said it was creating. I think the analytic structure in Dickerson supports this rethinking of Miranda. To connect the dots, I offer a new explanation for Miranda that permits us to reconcile Dickerson and the rest of the post-Miranda doctrine with the …
Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices: How Far Is Too Far?, Laurie Magid
Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices: How Far Is Too Far?, Laurie Magid
Michigan Law Review
Virtually all interrogations - or at least virtually all successful interrogations - involve some deception. As the United States Supreme Court has placed few limits on the use of deception, the variety of deceptive techniques is limited chiefly by the ingenuity of the interrogator. Interrogators still rely on the classic "Mutt and Jeff," or "good cop, bad cop," routine. Interrogators tell suspects that nonexistent eyewitnesses have identified them, or that still at-large accomplices have given statements against them. Interrogators have been known to put an unsophisticated suspect's hand on a fancy, new photocopy machine and tell him that the "Truth …
Stopping A Moving Target, Sherry F. Colb
Stopping A Moving Target, Sherry F. Colb
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Miranda Thirty-Five Years Later: A Close Look At The Majority And Dissenting Opinions In Dickerson, Yale Kamisar
Miranda Thirty-Five Years Later: A Close Look At The Majority And Dissenting Opinions In Dickerson, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Over the years, Miranda v. Arizona1 has been criticized both for going too far2 and for not going far enough.3 Nevertheless, on the basis of talks with many criminal procedure professors in the sixteen months between the time a panel of the Fourth Circuit upheld a statute (18 U.S.C. § 3501) purporting to "overrule" Miranda and a 7-2 majority of the Supreme Court overturned that ruling in the case of Dickerson v. United States,4 I am convinced that most criminal procedure professors wanted the Supreme Court to do what it did-"reaffirm" Miranda. This is not surprising. As Professor Grano once …
Where Hannah Arendt Went Wrong, David Abraham
Litigation In The United States And Mexico: A Comparative Overview, Robert M. Kossick, Jr.
Litigation In The United States And Mexico: A Comparative Overview, Robert M. Kossick, Jr.
University of Miami Inter-American Law Review
No abstract provided.
Public School Officials' Use Of Physical Force As A Fourth Amendment Seizure: Protecting Students From The Constitutional Chasm Between The Fourth And Fourteenth Amendments, Kathryn R. Urbonya
Public School Officials' Use Of Physical Force As A Fourth Amendment Seizure: Protecting Students From The Constitutional Chasm Between The Fourth And Fourteenth Amendments, Kathryn R. Urbonya
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Swisher V. Commonwealth 506 S.E.2d 763 (Va. 1998)
Swisher V. Commonwealth 506 S.E.2d 763 (Va. 1998)
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Practicing Medicine Without A License: Legislative Attempts To Mandate Chemical Castration For Repeat Sex Offenders, 32 J. Marshall L. Rev. 381 (1999), Lisa Keesling
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Federal Bribery Statute And The Ethics Of Purchasing Testimony, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 209 (1999), Camille Knight
Federal Bribery Statute And The Ethics Of Purchasing Testimony, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 209 (1999), Camille Knight
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Qualitative Dimension Of Fourth Amendment "Reasonableness", Sherry F. Colb
The Qualitative Dimension Of Fourth Amendment "Reasonableness", Sherry F. Colb
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
Supreme Court doctrine protects two seemingly distinct kinds of interests under the heading of privacy rights: one "substantive," the other "procedural." The Fourth Amendment guarantee against "unreasonable searches and seizures" has been generally interpreted to protect procedural privacy. Searches are typically defined as governmental inspections of activities and locations in which an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy from observation. In the typical case, this reasonable expectation of privacy may be breached only where the government has acquired a quantitatively substantial objective basis for believing that the search would uncover evidence of a crime. Substantive privacy rights have not …
Dubois V. Greene No. 97-21, 1998 Wl 276282 (4th Cir. May 20, 1998)
Dubois V. Greene No. 97-21, 1998 Wl 276282 (4th Cir. May 20, 1998)
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Fitzgerald V. Greene 150 F.3d 357 (4th Cir. 1998)
Fitzgerald V. Greene 150 F.3d 357 (4th Cir. 1998)
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Wright V. Angelone 151 F.3d 151 (4th Cir. 1998)
Wright V. Angelone 151 F.3d 151 (4th Cir. 1998)
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Jackson V. Commonwealth 499 S.E.2d 538 (Va. 1998)
Jackson V. Commonwealth 499 S.E.2d 538 (Va. 1998)
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Unconscious Racism And The Criminal Law, Sheri Johnson
Unconscious Racism And The Criminal Law, Sheri Johnson
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Criminal Procedure, Justice, Ethics, And Zeal, Darryl K. Brown
Criminal Procedure, Justice, Ethics, And Zeal, Darryl K. Brown
Michigan Law Review
William Stuntz's recent article, The Uneasy Relationship Between Criminal Procedure and Criminal Justice, offers a series of thoughtful observations on the reasons that criminal procedure doctrines designed to protect defendants have done so little to improve the criminal justice system. Stuntz's article describes the unintended effects of attempts by the United States Supreme Court to improve criminal justice by closely regulating criminal procedure. That procedural focus has had perverse effects because, in a dynamic criminal justice system, other institutional players have responded to procedural rules in ways that undermine appellate courts' goals. Specifically, legislatures have reacted by expanding substantive criminal …
Race, Rights, And Remedies In Criminal Adjudication, Pamela S. Karlan
Race, Rights, And Remedies In Criminal Adjudication, Pamela S. Karlan
Michigan Law Review
Once upon a time, back before the Warren Court, criminal procedure and racial justice were adjacent hinterlands in constitutional law's empire. In 1954, the fifth edition of Dowling's constitutional law casebook contained one chapter on "procedural due process" in which six of the eight cases were about criminal justice, and three of those - Powell v. Alabama, Moore v. Dempsey, and Bailey v. Alabama - were as much about race as they were about crime. A few pages later, two slender chapters on the "national protection of civil rights" and "equal protection of the laws" contained seven and nine decisions, …
A Modest Proposal: Requiring Proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt For Unadjudicated Acts Offered To Prove Future Dangerousness, Tommy Barrett
A Modest Proposal: Requiring Proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt For Unadjudicated Acts Offered To Prove Future Dangerousness, Tommy Barrett
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Does New York's Death Penalty Statute Violate The New York Constitution?, Honorable Stewart F. Hancock Jr., Christopher Quinn, Richard Klein
Does New York's Death Penalty Statute Violate The New York Constitution?, Honorable Stewart F. Hancock Jr., Christopher Quinn, Richard Klein
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Buchanan V. Angelone 103 F.3d 344 (4th Cir. 1996) United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Buchanan V. Angelone 103 F.3d 344 (4th Cir. 1996) United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Toward A More Effective Use Of Batson In Virginia Capital Trials, Daryl L. Rice, C. Cooper Youell, Iv
Toward A More Effective Use Of Batson In Virginia Capital Trials, Daryl L. Rice, C. Cooper Youell, Iv
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Is A Standard Of Proof Required For The Evaluation Of Unadjudicated Acts In Capital Sentencing?, David T. Mcindoe
Is A Standard Of Proof Required For The Evaluation Of Unadjudicated Acts In Capital Sentencing?, David T. Mcindoe
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
No More Excuses: Closing The Door On The Voluntary Intoxication Defense, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 535 (1997), Chad J. Layton
No More Excuses: Closing The Door On The Voluntary Intoxication Defense, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 535 (1997), Chad J. Layton
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Maximizing Your Potential: The Effective Use Of Co-Counsel In A Capital Case, Courtney S. Townes
Maximizing Your Potential: The Effective Use Of Co-Counsel In A Capital Case, Courtney S. Townes
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Fry V. Commonwealth 250 Va. 413, 463 S.E.2d 433 (1995) Supreme Court Of Virginia
Fry V. Commonwealth 250 Va. 413, 463 S.E.2d 433 (1995) Supreme Court Of Virginia
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
Litigating Jury Issues In Capital Trials: Constitutional Law And Virginia Procedures, Paula Dyan Effle
Litigating Jury Issues In Capital Trials: Constitutional Law And Virginia Procedures, Paula Dyan Effle
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.
A Disparity That Is Worlds Apart: The Federal Sentencing Guidelines Treatment Of Crack Cocaine And Powder Cocaine, Kimberley Mache Maxwell
A Disparity That Is Worlds Apart: The Federal Sentencing Guidelines Treatment Of Crack Cocaine And Powder Cocaine, Kimberley Mache Maxwell
Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Williams V. Commonwealth 248 Va. 528,450 S.E.2d 365 (1994) Supreme Court Of Virginia
Williams V. Commonwealth 248 Va. 528,450 S.E.2d 365 (1994) Supreme Court Of Virginia
Capital Defense Journal
No abstract provided.