Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons^™

Interaction Between State And Federal Right To Counsel: The Overruling Of Bartolomeounsel: The Overruling Of Bartolomeo, Joseph D. Sullivan

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Waiver Of Rights In The Interrogation Room: The Court's Dilemma, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.

Controlling Discretion By Administrative Regulations: The Use, Misuse, And The Nonuse Of Police Rules And Policies In Fourth Amendment Adjudication, Wayne R. Lafave

Michigan Law Review

In assaying fourth amendment jurisprudence, it is useful to take into account available knowledge regarding the actual search and seizure practices of the police. Especially helpful is the perspective afforded by the American Bar Foundation's Survey of the Administration of Criminal Justice in the United States, which ranks as the preeminent empirical study of law enforcement procedures in this country. Despite the fact - or, more likely, because of the fact that the ABF Survey was published over twenty years ago, certain insights from that study highlight some recent and significant changes in this corpus juris inconstans .

Clearly "the …

Smith V. Commonwealth 239 Va. 243,389 S.E.2d 871 (1990)

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Eaton V. Commonwealth No. 900238 (1990) (Lexis State Library, 125)

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Introduction, William S. Geimer

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Mu'min V. Commonwealth 239 Va. 433,389 S.E.2d 886 (1990)

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Cheng V. Commonwealth 240 Va. 26,393 S.E.2d 599 (1990)

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

State Habeas In Virginia: A Critical Transition, Catherine M. Hobart

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Perfecting The Record Of A Capital Case In Virginia, Robert L. Powley

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel, Thomas J. Marlowe

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Speaking And Writing Against Hate, Martha Minow

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Critical Points In The Progress Of A Capital Case, Elizabeth A. Bennett

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Capital Pretrial Motions: Added Dimensions, Thomas W. Plimpton, Kerry D. Lee

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Introduction, William S. Geimer

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Where Do We Go From Here? - Post-Conviction Review Of Death Sentences, Juliette A. Falkner

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Addressing The Needs Of Attorneys For The Damned, Sean O'Brien

Faculty Works

This article is an introduction to the UMKC Law Review symposium issue dedicated to exploring the topic of capital punishment. UMKC Professor of Law Sean O’Brien shares how the growing importance of capital litigation makes this a timely and appropriate subject for consideration and shares how the university and the Law Review's attention to the death penalty debate contributes to more than just academic discussion.

A Step Towards Fairness In Capital Litigation: Missouri Resource Center, Sean O'Brien

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

Where To Draw The Guideline: Factoring The Fruits Of Illegal Searches Into Sentencing Guidelines Calculations, Cheryl G. Bader, David S. Douglas

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Carrot And Stick" Sentencing: Structuring Incentives For Organizational Defendants, John C. Coffee Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

The new "Draft Guidelines for Organizational Defendants" released by the U.S. Sentencing Commission on October 25, 1990, explicitly adopt a "'carrot and stick' approach" to sentencing. While the boldly instrumental use made of sentencing penalties and credits in these guidelines will trouble some, the larger question is whether the Commission's social engineering will work. Two issues stand out: First, is the Commission's carrot mightier than its stick? At first glance, this may seem a surprising question because the "stick" in the Commission's guidelines seemingly packs a Ruthian wallop: fines under the draft guidelines are based on a multiple of the …

Confusing The Fifth Amendment With The Sixth: Lower Court Misapplication Of The Innis Definition Of Interrogation, Jonathan L. Marks

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines how these courts have applied or misapplied Innis, and concludes that, while many of these decisions are consistent with Miranda and Innis, too many others are not. In order to evaluate these cases, it is first necessary to understand the meaning and significance of Innis. Part I thus considers Innis and its background. Part II then examines lower court decisions applying the Innis test, dividing these decisions into six groups based on the most common factual scenarios. Because the cases deal with factually specific police practices, this method constitutes the most useful way to …

Police-Obtained Evidence And The Constitution: Distinguishing Unconstitutionally Obtained Evidence From Unconstitutionally Used Evidence, Arnold H. Loewy

Michigan Law Review

The article will consider four different types of police-obtained evidence: evidence obtained from an unconstitutional search and seizure, evidence obtained from a Miranda violation, confessions and lineup identifications obtained in violation of the sixth amendment right to counsel, and coerced confessions. My conclusions are that evidence obtained from an unconstitutional search and seizure is excluded because of the police misconduct by which it was obtained. On the other hand, evidence obtained from a Miranda violation is (or ought to be) excluded because use of that evidence compromises the defendant's procedural right not to be compelled to be a witness against …

Search And Seizure: It's Time The Court Shed Some Light On The Use Of Ultraviolet Lamps, 22 J. Marshall L. Rev. 877 (1989), M. Jeffrey Tucker

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Wisconsin Sentence Modification: A View From The Trial Court, Kate Kruse, Kim E. Patterson

Faculty Scholarship

In Wisconsin, trial courts have discretion to modify a defendant's criminal sentence if the defendant introduces a "new factor." Published Wisconsin case law gives little guidance on what constitutes a new factor. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has declined to find a new factor present in every case it has published since defining "new factor" in 1978. Because of ambiguous and conflicting rulings, the standards for both prongs of the new factor definition remain unclear. This Comment attempts to shed light on the new factor requirement for sentence modification by examining Wisconsin trial court decisions on a limited sample of sentence …

Police Trespass And The Fourth Amendment: A Wall In Need Of Mending, 22 J. Marshall L. Rev. 795 (1989), Clifford S. Fishman

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Duckworth V. Eagan: A Little-Noticed Miranda Case That May Cause Much Mischief, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Professor Yale Kamisar, the country's foremost scholar of Miranda and police interrogation, presents an analysis and critique of the Supreme Court's latest interpretation of Miranda. In Duckworth, a 5-4 Court upheld the "if and when" language systematically used by the Hammond, Indiana, Police Department: "We have no way of giving you a lawyer, but one will be appointed for you, if you wish, if and when you go to court." The real issue was whether the police effectively conveyed the substance of a vital part of Miranda: the right to have a lawyer appointed prior to any questioning. Professor Kamisar …

Arizona V. Youngblood: Does The Criminal Defendant Lose His Right To Due Process When The State Loses Exculpatory Evidence?, Willis C. Moore

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Miranda Decision Revisited: Did It Give Criminals Too Many Rights?, Paul Marcus, Stephen J. Markman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Mccleskey V. Kemp: The Supreme Court Pulls The Switch On Future Judicial Challenges To The Death Penalty, 22 J. Marshall L. Rev. 215 (1988), William H. Jones

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Griffin V. Wisconsin Warrantless Probation Searches - Do The State's Needs Warrant Such Strict Measures, 21 J. Marshall L. Rev. 921 (1988), William Blake Weiler

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.