POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 12/12, I distributed one last handout, the Maine civil and criminal jurisdiction statutes, and we went over how to read them. I reminded the class that Exam #2 will be Tuesday 12/17 from 9:30-10:45. If you are missing any handouts, email me with your requests by 8:00 pm on Monday 12/16. I also reminded the class to please complete the on-line evaluations.
We then looked at the recognition statutes that I distributed last class, and saw how the federal statute regarding non-recognition for out-of-state same sex marriages is still on the books, even though the Supreme Court has said that it is unconstitutional. We then discussed both the Maine Supreme Court case of Landmark Realty v. Leasure, and the U.S. Supreme Court case of Bowles v. Russell, and noted the different approaches taken by the the two courts for the definition of subject-matter jurisdiction within their respective court systems. Finally, I talked to the class about the 2017 U.S. Supreme Court case of Hamer v. Neighborhood Housing, which unanimously ruled on whether a failure to meet a deadline in the federal rules was a failure of subject-matter jurisdiction.
See you Tuesday.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 12/12, I first reminded the class that Exam #2 will be Thursday 12/19 from 9:30-10:45. If you are missing any handouts, email me with your requests by 8:00 pm on Wednesday 12/18. I also reminded the class to please complete the on-line evaluations.
We then spent the class period looking at Montejo v. Louisiana. We first clarified what Jackson had decided, and how the 2 sides in Montego had different visions of how Jackson should be interpreted under the Louisiana procedure for appointment of counsel. We looked at the outline of Scalia's opinion, and then saw how the Court majority reached an issue that neither party had brought up.
See you Thursday.
Thursday, December 12, 2019
Tuesday, December 10, 2019
December 10, 2019
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 12/10, I distributed 3 handouts: the Maine Supreme Cort opinion in Landmark Realty v. Leasure, the U.S. Supreme Court case of Bowles v. Russell, and Maine and federal recognition statutes.
I reminded the class to please fill out the online evaluations. I also reminded the class that Exam #2 will be on Tuesday 12/17 from 9:30-10:45.
We first went over Finstuen v. Crutcher, covering both the requirements of Full Faith and Credit for recognition of the adoption judgment, and then the rules regarding enforcement of the judgment. We then discussed the Obergefell excerpt, going over the constitutional basis for forced recognition of marriage. We discussed VL v. EL, which dealt with both Full Faith and Credit, and subject-matter jurisdiction. We began our look at the Maine and federal statutes by looking at the Maine adoption statute, and will pick up on Thursday by looking at the other statutes, especially the federal statute.
The assignment for Thursday 12/12 is to read all 3 of today's handouts.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 12/10, I distributed 1 handout: the U.S. Supreme Court case of Montejo v. Louisiana.
I reminded the class to please fill out the online evaluations. I also reminded the class that Exam #2 will be on Thursday 12/19 from 9:30-10:45.
We first looked at the text of the 6th Amendment and its list of protections fro the criminal defendant. We then focused on the last of those protections, the right to counsel. I went over the Due Process protections in Powell v. Alabama, and then the rejection of incorporation in Betts. We talked about how Gideon v. Wainwright overruled Betts (though I still want to discuss on Thursday the question of to which criminal prosecutions the right to counsel attaches (is it capital cases, felonies, all crimes that have the potential penalty of imprisonment?). We looked at the progression from Jackson to Montejo (waiver), and from Henry to Kuhlmann (informants). We compared the resultin Rhode v. Innis to that in Brewer v. Williams. Then we went through the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment issues in Dominique.
The assignment for Thursday 12/12 is to review Gideon v. Wainwright, and to read today's handout.
In class today, Tuesday 12/10, I distributed 3 handouts: the Maine Supreme Cort opinion in Landmark Realty v. Leasure, the U.S. Supreme Court case of Bowles v. Russell, and Maine and federal recognition statutes.
I reminded the class to please fill out the online evaluations. I also reminded the class that Exam #2 will be on Tuesday 12/17 from 9:30-10:45.
We first went over Finstuen v. Crutcher, covering both the requirements of Full Faith and Credit for recognition of the adoption judgment, and then the rules regarding enforcement of the judgment. We then discussed the Obergefell excerpt, going over the constitutional basis for forced recognition of marriage. We discussed VL v. EL, which dealt with both Full Faith and Credit, and subject-matter jurisdiction. We began our look at the Maine and federal statutes by looking at the Maine adoption statute, and will pick up on Thursday by looking at the other statutes, especially the federal statute.
The assignment for Thursday 12/12 is to read all 3 of today's handouts.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 12/10, I distributed 1 handout: the U.S. Supreme Court case of Montejo v. Louisiana.
I reminded the class to please fill out the online evaluations. I also reminded the class that Exam #2 will be on Thursday 12/19 from 9:30-10:45.
We first looked at the text of the 6th Amendment and its list of protections fro the criminal defendant. We then focused on the last of those protections, the right to counsel. I went over the Due Process protections in Powell v. Alabama, and then the rejection of incorporation in Betts. We talked about how Gideon v. Wainwright overruled Betts (though I still want to discuss on Thursday the question of to which criminal prosecutions the right to counsel attaches (is it capital cases, felonies, all crimes that have the potential penalty of imprisonment?). We looked at the progression from Jackson to Montejo (waiver), and from Henry to Kuhlmann (informants). We compared the resultin Rhode v. Innis to that in Brewer v. Williams. Then we went through the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment issues in Dominique.
The assignment for Thursday 12/12 is to review Gideon v. Wainwright, and to read today's handout.
Thursday, December 5, 2019
December 5, 2019
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 12/5, I distributed 2 handouts: an excerpt from the same-sex marriage case of Obergefell v. Hodges, and the Supreme Court opinion of V.L. v. E.L. We went through the textbook cases of Hubbard v. Greeson and Land v. Yamaha, admiring the seemingly good lawyering in Hubbard, and criticizing the seemingly bad lawyering in Land, in terms of getting the right forum state, which will apply the right choice of law rule, which will then apply the right substantive law. I also discussed the Maine case of Collins v. Trius, in which the Court had to decide whether Maine or Canadian damages law applied to a bus accident in Maine. Finally, I gave an introduction to our next topic, Full Faith and Credit.
I also reminded the class to fill out the on-line class evaluation that you should have received in your email. Please and thank you.
The assignment for Tuesday 12/10 is to read today's 2 handouts, and to read in the text pp. 116-120, including Finstuen v. Crutcher.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 12/5, I distributed one handout, the Maine Supreme Court opinion of State v. Dominique, 2008 ME 180. We reviewed and then finished our discussion of Nightingale, going over all 4 of Nightingale's contentions. We then went back into the text, including Moran v. Burbine and Rhode Island v. Innis.
I also reminded the class to fill out the on-line class evaluation that you should have received in your email. Please and thank you.
The assignment for Tuesday 12/10 is to read today's handout, to review in the text pp. 340-345 and to read in the text pp. 487-490 (Gideon v. Wainwright).
In class today, Thursday 12/5, I distributed 2 handouts: an excerpt from the same-sex marriage case of Obergefell v. Hodges, and the Supreme Court opinion of V.L. v. E.L. We went through the textbook cases of Hubbard v. Greeson and Land v. Yamaha, admiring the seemingly good lawyering in Hubbard, and criticizing the seemingly bad lawyering in Land, in terms of getting the right forum state, which will apply the right choice of law rule, which will then apply the right substantive law. I also discussed the Maine case of Collins v. Trius, in which the Court had to decide whether Maine or Canadian damages law applied to a bus accident in Maine. Finally, I gave an introduction to our next topic, Full Faith and Credit.
I also reminded the class to fill out the on-line class evaluation that you should have received in your email. Please and thank you.
The assignment for Tuesday 12/10 is to read today's 2 handouts, and to read in the text pp. 116-120, including Finstuen v. Crutcher.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 12/5, I distributed one handout, the Maine Supreme Court opinion of State v. Dominique, 2008 ME 180. We reviewed and then finished our discussion of Nightingale, going over all 4 of Nightingale's contentions. We then went back into the text, including Moran v. Burbine and Rhode Island v. Innis.
I also reminded the class to fill out the on-line class evaluation that you should have received in your email. Please and thank you.
The assignment for Tuesday 12/10 is to read today's handout, to review in the text pp. 340-345 and to read in the text pp. 487-490 (Gideon v. Wainwright).
Tuesday, November 26, 2019
November 26, 2019
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 11/26, I handed back the Betton case briefs, and also handed out the Betton Comment Key. I made a few comments about the grading of the case briefs. We then started exploring the question of retroactivity. We went over why Miranda applied to the Butler case at all, even though the interrogation in Butler took place well before the Supreme Court decided Miranda. I discussed Johnson v. New Jersey, the 1966 Supreme Court case that decided the question of the retroactive application of Miranda. We went over Dempsey, and how the Montana Supreme Court made their own rule regarding retroactivity. Once we finished retroactivity, and we went over Strunk and the lack of precedent, I gave an introduction to our next subject of conflict of law rules. We discussed the relationship between personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, and conflict of law rules.
The assignment for Tuesday 12/3 is to read in the text pp. 113-116 (Hubbard v. Greeson) and pp. 144-146 (Land v. Yamaha).
Have a good Thanksgiving break.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 11/26, we admired the technique of Detective Keegan in securing admissible confessions in all of these cases. We began by going over the Jones case, discussing "custody", consideration of age, and voluntariness. We then turned to Nightingale. We got up through the plurality and the Kennedy positions in terms of "Miranda in the middle", and we'll pick up next week with how the Maine Supreme Court decided what the holding of Seibert really was.
The assignment for Tuesday 12/3 is to review Nightingale, and review the previous assignment in the textbook. In addition, read the rest of Chapter 8 in the text, through p. 345 of the text.
Have a good Thanksgiving break.
In class today, Tuesday 11/26, I handed back the Betton case briefs, and also handed out the Betton Comment Key. I made a few comments about the grading of the case briefs. We then started exploring the question of retroactivity. We went over why Miranda applied to the Butler case at all, even though the interrogation in Butler took place well before the Supreme Court decided Miranda. I discussed Johnson v. New Jersey, the 1966 Supreme Court case that decided the question of the retroactive application of Miranda. We went over Dempsey, and how the Montana Supreme Court made their own rule regarding retroactivity. Once we finished retroactivity, and we went over Strunk and the lack of precedent, I gave an introduction to our next subject of conflict of law rules. We discussed the relationship between personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, and conflict of law rules.
The assignment for Tuesday 12/3 is to read in the text pp. 113-116 (Hubbard v. Greeson) and pp. 144-146 (Land v. Yamaha).
Have a good Thanksgiving break.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 11/26, we admired the technique of Detective Keegan in securing admissible confessions in all of these cases. We began by going over the Jones case, discussing "custody", consideration of age, and voluntariness. We then turned to Nightingale. We got up through the plurality and the Kennedy positions in terms of "Miranda in the middle", and we'll pick up next week with how the Maine Supreme Court decided what the holding of Seibert really was.
The assignment for Tuesday 12/3 is to review Nightingale, and review the previous assignment in the textbook. In addition, read the rest of Chapter 8 in the text, through p. 345 of the text.
Have a good Thanksgiving break.
Thursday, November 21, 2019
November 21, 2019
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 11/21, I collected the Betton case briefs, and also distributed my version of the brief. We went over the Betton case, including possible strategies for the defense on remand. We then went over the Butler case and the issue of dictum. I reviewed three types of dictum that we've encountered this semester. I then discussed the 1971 case of Harris v. New York in which the Supreme Court confronted the same question as in Butler.
The assignment for Tuesday 11/26 is to read in the text through p. 113, including Dempsey and Strunk.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 11/21, I distributed one handout, the Maine Supreme Court opinion in State v. Nightingale, 2012 ME 132. We then began our study of the 3 Maine cases assigned for today, Prescott, Bragg, and Jones. We got through Prescott and Bragg, but not to Jones. So we will begin class on Tuesday with Jones, and then go on to the textbook assignment (below) and to Nightingale.
The assignment for Tuesday 11/26 is to review Jones, read in the text pp. 317-340, including Moran v. Burbine and Rhode Island v. Innis, and also today's handout, Nightingale.
In class today, Thursday 11/21, I collected the Betton case briefs, and also distributed my version of the brief. We went over the Betton case, including possible strategies for the defense on remand. We then went over the Butler case and the issue of dictum. I reviewed three types of dictum that we've encountered this semester. I then discussed the 1971 case of Harris v. New York in which the Supreme Court confronted the same question as in Butler.
The assignment for Tuesday 11/26 is to read in the text through p. 113, including Dempsey and Strunk.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 11/21, I distributed one handout, the Maine Supreme Court opinion in State v. Nightingale, 2012 ME 132. We then began our study of the 3 Maine cases assigned for today, Prescott, Bragg, and Jones. We got through Prescott and Bragg, but not to Jones. So we will begin class on Tuesday with Jones, and then go on to the textbook assignment (below) and to Nightingale.
The assignment for Tuesday 11/26 is to review Jones, read in the text pp. 317-340, including Moran v. Burbine and Rhode Island v. Innis, and also today's handout, Nightingale.
Tuesday, November 19, 2019
November 19, 2019
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 11/19, we first went over some aspects of the Betton case brief due at the beginning of class on Thursday. We then discussed NFIB v. Sebelius from the textbook. I went over a little history of the limitations on Congressional power (no "police power"), and how the interstate commerce power has sometimes had a narrow, and sometimes, a broad, interpretation from the Supreme Court. I gave a little background to the confusing votes in the case, and how the individual mandate was eventually upheld, not under the interstate commerce power, but under Congress' taxing power. I then talked to the class about the current case of Texas v. U.S. in which the U.S. District Court struck down the entirety of the Affordable Care Act, as the individual mandate had lost its mooring to the Congressional taxing power. That case is currently awaiting decision by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. We also talked about the concept of dictum, and saw how that concept came into play in NFIB v. Sebelius.
The assignment for Thursday 11/21 is to finish up the Betton case briefs, due at the beginning of Thursday's class. Also read in the text through p. 107, including State v. Butler,
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 11/19, I distributed 3 handouts: the Maine Supreme Court opinions in State v. Prescott 2012 ME 96, State v. Bragg, 2012 ME 102, and State v. Jones, 2012 ME 126 (2012 was a very good year for Miranda cases in Maine). I began by discussing the Maine case of State v. Rees, 2000 ME 55, in which the Maine Supreme Court elected not to follow Colorado v. Connnelly. We then went through the elements of the Miranda opinion. In terms of what it means to be in custody, we looked at Berkemer v. McCarty at p. 310 of the text. Finally we discussed the majority and dissenting opinions in J.D.B. and the juvenile suspect.
The assignment for Thursday 11/21 is to read today's three handouts. (If you weren't in class, you can access the cases most easily by going to Google Scholar, selecting "case law" and "select courts", select the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, and type the citation into the search dialog box.)
In class today, Tuesday 11/19, we first went over some aspects of the Betton case brief due at the beginning of class on Thursday. We then discussed NFIB v. Sebelius from the textbook. I went over a little history of the limitations on Congressional power (no "police power"), and how the interstate commerce power has sometimes had a narrow, and sometimes, a broad, interpretation from the Supreme Court. I gave a little background to the confusing votes in the case, and how the individual mandate was eventually upheld, not under the interstate commerce power, but under Congress' taxing power. I then talked to the class about the current case of Texas v. U.S. in which the U.S. District Court struck down the entirety of the Affordable Care Act, as the individual mandate had lost its mooring to the Congressional taxing power. That case is currently awaiting decision by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. We also talked about the concept of dictum, and saw how that concept came into play in NFIB v. Sebelius.
The assignment for Thursday 11/21 is to finish up the Betton case briefs, due at the beginning of Thursday's class. Also read in the text through p. 107, including State v. Butler,
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 11/19, I distributed 3 handouts: the Maine Supreme Court opinions in State v. Prescott 2012 ME 96, State v. Bragg, 2012 ME 102, and State v. Jones, 2012 ME 126 (2012 was a very good year for Miranda cases in Maine). I began by discussing the Maine case of State v. Rees, 2000 ME 55, in which the Maine Supreme Court elected not to follow Colorado v. Connnelly. We then went through the elements of the Miranda opinion. In terms of what it means to be in custody, we looked at Berkemer v. McCarty at p. 310 of the text. Finally we discussed the majority and dissenting opinions in J.D.B. and the juvenile suspect.
The assignment for Thursday 11/21 is to read today's three handouts. (If you weren't in class, you can access the cases most easily by going to Google Scholar, selecting "case law" and "select courts", select the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, and type the citation into the search dialog box.)
Thursday, November 14, 2019
November 14, 2019
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 11/14, we spent most of the class period clarifying aspects of the Betton case brief due next Thursday. We worked through all of the segments of the brief up to the Issues, Facts, and Holding. I also specified that if you are unable to come to class when the brief is due next Thursday, and you need to submit your brief to me by email, I want you to attach it as a pdf or a Word document, and not in Google docs.
We also went over the 2 bases of federal trial court jurisdiction (federal question and diversity) by way of explaining why Betton was eligible to be heard in the federal court system.
The assignment for Tuesday 11/19 is to continue work on your Betton case brief (due at the beginning of class on 11/21) and to review the textbook through NFIB v. Sebelius, previously assigned.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 11/14, we began with a little more inquiry into qualified immunity. We talked about the handout of recent Circuit Court cases that granted qualified immunity to police, even though there was a determination that the police had in fact used excessive force. I also discussed the recent case of Betton v. Belue, in which the 4th Circuit found both excessive force, and that the prohibition on the use of such force in those circumstances was clearly established. I also discussed the two bases of federal trial court jurisdiction, federal question and diversity. We then moved onto confessions. We walked through the 5 protections of the 5th Amendment, and then came back to the protection of against being compelled to be a witness against yourself in a criminal case. We saw how the interpretation of that protection was not limited to the actual text of the 5th Amendment, but was also not unlimited. We saw in Connelly how the exercise of free will was not the test for what is compelled, and we saw in Schmerber how simply forcing a suspect to give up incriminating evidence was also not the test.
The assignment for Tuesday 11/19 is to read in the text through p. 317, including Miranda and J.D.B.
In class today, Thursday 11/14, we spent most of the class period clarifying aspects of the Betton case brief due next Thursday. We worked through all of the segments of the brief up to the Issues, Facts, and Holding. I also specified that if you are unable to come to class when the brief is due next Thursday, and you need to submit your brief to me by email, I want you to attach it as a pdf or a Word document, and not in Google docs.
We also went over the 2 bases of federal trial court jurisdiction (federal question and diversity) by way of explaining why Betton was eligible to be heard in the federal court system.
The assignment for Tuesday 11/19 is to continue work on your Betton case brief (due at the beginning of class on 11/21) and to review the textbook through NFIB v. Sebelius, previously assigned.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 11/14, we began with a little more inquiry into qualified immunity. We talked about the handout of recent Circuit Court cases that granted qualified immunity to police, even though there was a determination that the police had in fact used excessive force. I also discussed the recent case of Betton v. Belue, in which the 4th Circuit found both excessive force, and that the prohibition on the use of such force in those circumstances was clearly established. I also discussed the two bases of federal trial court jurisdiction, federal question and diversity. We then moved onto confessions. We walked through the 5 protections of the 5th Amendment, and then came back to the protection of against being compelled to be a witness against yourself in a criminal case. We saw how the interpretation of that protection was not limited to the actual text of the 5th Amendment, but was also not unlimited. We saw in Connelly how the exercise of free will was not the test for what is compelled, and we saw in Schmerber how simply forcing a suspect to give up incriminating evidence was also not the test.
The assignment for Tuesday 11/19 is to read in the text through p. 317, including Miranda and J.D.B.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)