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.

Saturday, October 9, 2010

Grits for Breakfast: Brady violations by DPS fingerprint examiners? Is ...

Grits for Breakfast: Brady violations by DPS fingerprint examiners? Is ...: "There was an astonishing moment yesterday at a breakout session on fingerprint examination at the Texas Forensic Science Seminar, at which D..."

Email This BlogThis!Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest

Newer Post Older Post Home

Susan E. Allen

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

CrimProf Blog

Swisher on Algorithmic Judicial Ethics - Keith Swisher (University of Arizona - James E. Rogers College of Law) has posted Algorithmic Judicial Ethics (Wisconsin Law Review, Forthcoming 2024) on S...
3 hours ago
SCOTUSblog

Court declines death penalty case on jury selection - [image: Court declines death penalty case on jury selection]Over a written dissent by two justices, the Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up a dea...
5 hours ago
The Volokh Conspiracy

[Bryan Caplan] Trillions - Why *Build, Baby, Build* should be a top libertarian priority. First in a series of guest-blogging posts.
8 hours ago
De Novo: A Virginia Appellate Law Blog

VTLA Appellate Panel - At the VTLA’s annual meeting earlier this month, Kyle McNew moderated an appellate panel featuring Justice Mann and Judges Malveaux and Ortiz. High-level...
1 week ago
ABA Journal Top Stories

More lawyers—and clients—want to learn about sustainable development practices -
1 month 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...
9 months 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 ...
6 years ago
Regent Law

-
Virginia DUI Lawyers Discuss VA DWI Law: DUIAttorney.com

-

Facebook Badge

The Law Office of Susan E. Allen

Promote Your Page Too

Subscribe To

Posts

Posts

Comments

Comments

Blog Archive

► 2012 (3)
- ► February (3)

► 2011 (4)
- ► August (1)
- ► March (3)

▼ 2010 (85)
- ► December (1)
- ► November (1)
- ▼ October (16)
- ► 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.