The Law: From Richmond and Beyond

Recent happenings with law and interesting cases. The postings in this blog are not legal advice and do not create an attorney client relationship. These postings are for general informational purposes only. If you have a specific legal problem, consult an attorney.

Monday, October 18, 2010

"Don't Talk to the Police" by Professor James Duane

"Don't Talk to the Police" by Professor James Duane
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Newer Post Older Post Home

Susan E. Allen

My photo
Susan E. Allen
Richmond, Virginia, United States
1805 Monument Ave., Ste. 301 Richmond, VA 23220
View my complete profile

Susan Allen's Recent Reads

Inter Alia

  • The Volokh Conspiracy
    [Ilya Somin] A Libertarian Perspective on the 2026 Election - Why we should vote "Democrat by Default" for federal offices - with a few rare exceptions. I build on a post by political philosopher Dan Shapiro.
    5 hours ago
  • SCOTUSblog
    Justices to debate when an established rule is “previously unavailable” in habeas case - The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Nov. 4 in *Guerrero v. Johnson*, a case about the limited circumstances in which a state prisoner can return ...
    14 hours ago
  • De Novo: A Virginia Appellate Law Blog
    Ream v. Egan–SCOVA Oral Argument on Pleading Standards in Gross-Negligence Cases - The Supreme Court of Virginia heard argument yesterday in *Ream v. Egan*, Record No. 250979. The issue on appeal is whether the Court of Appeals erred by...
    1 day ago
  • ABA Journal Top Stories
    Disbarred lawyer allegedly collected client fees, faked performing work - {mag_summary}A disbarred Indiana attorney has been accused of collecting legal fees and pretending to perform the work that he was hired to do. Jared Thomas,…
    3 days ago
  • CrimProf Blog
    All the Wrong Questions (Part 3) – Normative Opacity in the Age of Strong AI - As we achieve more intelligent machines… are there things about criminal justice that we ought to refuse to allow anyone to learn?
    1 year ago
  • DUI BLOG
    Can You Get a DUI From the Passenger Seat? - Can You Get a DUI From the Passenger Seat? Permitted Drivers and Drunk Supervisors Picture this scene. You’re at a SoCal family dinner party. The party...
    3 years ago
  • WSJ.com: Law Blog
    The WSJ Law Blog: 2006-2017 - More than a decade ago, The Wall Street Journal launched Law Blog. It had a simple name but a novel approach to legal coverage in the pre-Twitter era. The ...
    9 years ago
  • Virginia DUI Lawyers Discuss VA DWI Law: DUIAttorney.com
    -
  • Regent Law
    -

Facebook Badge

The Law Office of Susan E. Allen

Promote Your Page Too

Subscribe To

Posts
Atom
Posts
Comments
Atom
Comments

Blog Archive

  • ►  2012 (3)
    • ►  February (3)
  • ►  2011 (4)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  March (3)
  • ▼  2010 (85)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ▼  October (16)
      • Drug Possession and Going to College
      • Presentence Report: What You Don't Know Might Hurt...
      • Facing a criminal trial, contractor settles claims
      • Only One Thing Counts in This World: Get Them to S...
      • "Don't Talk to the Police" by Professor James Duane
      • A Really Intrusive Search. Really, Really Intrusive
      • It had to happen.
      • Argument preview: Excludable confessions and effec...
      • On the ethics of fake friending
      • CA4: DL checkpoint stop was valid
      • Grits for Breakfast: Brady violations by DPS finge...
      • New law review articcle: "A Fourth Amendment for t...
      • Bank of America Extends Foreclosure Moratorium to ...
      • Being a landlord or tenant has pitfalls | Richmond...
      • New Post on Prosecutorial Misconduct
      • Being a landlord or tenant has pitfalls | Richmond...
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  August (18)
    • ►  July (18)
    • ►  June (12)
    • ►  May (6)
    • ►  April (10)
"The very premise of our adversary system of criminal justice is that partisan advocacy on both sides of a case will best promote the ultimate objective that the guilty be convicted and the innocent go free." Herring v. New York, 422 U.S. 853, 862 (1975).

"The right to the effective assistance of counsel is thus the right of the accused to require the prosecution's case to survive the crucible of meaningful adversarial testing. When a true adversarial criminal trial has been conducted ... the kind of testing envisioned by the Sixth Amendment has occurred. But if the process loses its character as a confrontation between adversaries, the constitutional guarantee is violated." United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 655-56 (1984).

We, as criminal defense lawyers, are forced to deal with some of the lowest people on earth, people who have no sense of right and wrong, people who will lie in court to get what they want, people who do not care who gets hurt in the process. It is our job–our sworn duty–as criminal defense lawyers, to protect our clients from those people. —Cynthia Roseberry.

"[O]ur so-called adversary system is not adversary at all; nor should it be. But defense counsel has no comparable obligation to ascertain or present the truth. Our system assigns him a different mission. He must be and is interested in preventing the conviction of the innocent, but, absent a voluntary plea of guilty, we also insist that he defend his client whether he is innocent or guilty. ... [A]s part of our modified adversary system and as part of the duty imposed on the most honorable defense counsel, we countenance or require conduct which in many instances has little, if any, relation to the search for truth." —Justice White concurring and dissenting in U.S. v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218, 256-58 (1967).

“Many think it not only inevitable but entirely proper that liberty give way to security in times of national crisis–that, at the extremes of military exigency, inter arma silent leges. Whatever the general merits of the view that war silences law or modulates its voice, that view has no place in the interpretation and application of a Constitution designed precisely to confront war and, in a manner that accords with democratic principles, to accommodate it.” Justice Scalia, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, dissent by Scalia and Stevens.
Awesome Inc. theme. Powered by Blogger.