POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 9/30, I distributed one handout, my version of the Glucksberg case brief. We went over that case and brief, getting as far as the rational reasons for a ban on assisted suicide (which is where we'll pick up on Thursday). Along the way, we went over the organization of the federal court system, the concept of low and high hurdles for the government, and the concept of following precedent versus distinguishing precedent. The assignment for Thursday 10/2 is to read and do a case brief of the Speelman case (through p. 38 of the text). This brief is not to hand in or be graded, but it is important practice before our first graded case brief.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 9/30, I distributed one handout, Assignment #1, which is reproduced below. We first went over the Gates case, discussing both the majority decision and the dissent. We then began our discussion of Navarette, talking about the "reasonable suspicion" standard at issue there, and also going through the line-up of the Justices. The assignment for Thursday 10/2 is to work on the Navarette outline, due Tuesday 10/7.
Assignment #1, due Tuesday October 7, 2014
The assignment is to do an outline of Navarette v. California (distributed to the class 9/23).
Follow the format from the Sample Outlines that I’ve distributed. Your outlines will be evaluated on the format, as well as the specific content. Note that the basic format is Title (for the Roman numerals); and then Question and Answer for the other elements. Add elements to the outline as necessary in order to cover the points raised by the Justices and italicize those added elements. Outline both the majority and the dissenting opinions.
The assignment will be graded on both the structure and the content of your outline. The outline will also be graded on how well you write English, and how clearly you organize your thoughts. I like short clear sentences better than long complicated ones. I like correct grammar.
Please make two copies of your outline, one to hand in at the beginning of class, and the other for you to have during class for our discussion.
You may e-mail me if you have specific questions about the assignment. The more time that I have to answer your questions, the more likely it is that I can be helpful.
If you cannot be in class on Tuesday 10/7, you should still e-mail me your assignment by the beginning of class time. If you do that, you will not have any grade deducted from your grade for the outline. If you do not, you should still contact me as soon as possible to see what options are available to you. (Generally, I do not want to accept assignments after we have discussed them in class). See the Syllabus for the class rules regarding late papers.
The work should be entirely your own, with no collaboration or plagiarism. Do not show your paper to anyone. Do not look at anyone else’s paper. See the syllabus regarding plagiarism and collaboration.
IMPORTANT: If you e-mail your assignment to me, I will reply to confirm that I have received your assignment. If you do not get a reply, then I have not received the assignment.
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
September 23, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
IN class today, Tuesday 9/23, I distributed one handout, the case brief template. We finished up Roberts' dissent in Miller, and also talked about the Thomas and Alito dissents. We discussed originalism as a mode of constitutional interpretation, and we also talked about the three major areas of institutional conflict with which the Supreme Court deals: separation of powers; federalism, and the rights of individuals. We went over the Maine sentencing statute and discussed the effect of Miller on Maine law. We also went over the proper citation form for Maine statutes. We began our discussion of Glucksberg and the case brief, getting as far as the cause of action. We will finish the cause of action and go on from there when I rejoin you next Tuesday 9/29. Working on a Glucksberg case brief, using the template as your guide, is your assignment for Tuesday 9/30. On Thursday 9/25, I won't be in class. but the class will watch part of the PBS series,"The Supreme Court", in an episode about the Rehnquist Revolution.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 9/23, I distributed two handouts: my version of the outline of the Jardines dissent, and the opinion of Navarette v. California. We went over the concurring and dissenting opinions in Jardines, putting the dissent in the outline format. On Thursday 9/25, I won't be in class. but the class will watch part of the PBS series,"The Supreme Court", in an episode about the A Nation of Liberties" (WWII to Nixon's election). The assignment for Tuesday 9/30 is to review the Gates case from the text (previously assigned); to read the Navarette opinion; and to begin your outline of both the Navarette majority opinion and the dissent.
IN class today, Tuesday 9/23, I distributed one handout, the case brief template. We finished up Roberts' dissent in Miller, and also talked about the Thomas and Alito dissents. We discussed originalism as a mode of constitutional interpretation, and we also talked about the three major areas of institutional conflict with which the Supreme Court deals: separation of powers; federalism, and the rights of individuals. We went over the Maine sentencing statute and discussed the effect of Miller on Maine law. We also went over the proper citation form for Maine statutes. We began our discussion of Glucksberg and the case brief, getting as far as the cause of action. We will finish the cause of action and go on from there when I rejoin you next Tuesday 9/29. Working on a Glucksberg case brief, using the template as your guide, is your assignment for Tuesday 9/30. On Thursday 9/25, I won't be in class. but the class will watch part of the PBS series,"The Supreme Court", in an episode about the Rehnquist Revolution.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 9/23, I distributed two handouts: my version of the outline of the Jardines dissent, and the opinion of Navarette v. California. We went over the concurring and dissenting opinions in Jardines, putting the dissent in the outline format. On Thursday 9/25, I won't be in class. but the class will watch part of the PBS series,"The Supreme Court", in an episode about the A Nation of Liberties" (WWII to Nixon's election). The assignment for Tuesday 9/30 is to review the Gates case from the text (previously assigned); to read the Navarette opinion; and to begin your outline of both the Navarette majority opinion and the dissent.
Thursday, September 18, 2014
September 18, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 9/18, we went through the Miller case and put it into outline form. We looked at the two lines of precedent cited by Justice Kagan and how they were applied to the facts of these two cases. We then looked at Breyer's concurrence, and Roberts' dissent We will begin on Tuesday with the second point of Roberts' dissent, the question of deference to the legislative branch, and then go through the other two dissenting opinions. We will also look at Maine's Sentencing Statute, previously distributed. The additional assignment for Tuesday 9/23 is to read in the text through p. 34 (Gluckberg).
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 9/18, I distributed two handouts: the Florida v. Jardines opinion, and my model outline and outline format for the majority opinion in Jardines. We talked about the issue in this 2013 case about the use of drug-sniffing dogs, and then went through the outline of the majority's opinion. We compared the votes of the Justices in Jardines versus Jones. We also discussed the Oliver case involving open fields. We then saw what arguments we could anticipate that the Jardines dissenters would make. The assignment for Tuesday 9/23 is to read the entire Jardines opinion handout. Be prepared to discuss (but you don't need to outline) the concurring opinion. Outline the dissenting opinion, following the format of the model outline I distributed today. This outline will not be handed in or graded, but it will be the practice in this format before I assign the outline that will be graded.
In class today, Thursday 9/18, we went through the Miller case and put it into outline form. We looked at the two lines of precedent cited by Justice Kagan and how they were applied to the facts of these two cases. We then looked at Breyer's concurrence, and Roberts' dissent We will begin on Tuesday with the second point of Roberts' dissent, the question of deference to the legislative branch, and then go through the other two dissenting opinions. We will also look at Maine's Sentencing Statute, previously distributed. The additional assignment for Tuesday 9/23 is to read in the text through p. 34 (Gluckberg).
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 9/18, I distributed two handouts: the Florida v. Jardines opinion, and my model outline and outline format for the majority opinion in Jardines. We talked about the issue in this 2013 case about the use of drug-sniffing dogs, and then went through the outline of the majority's opinion. We compared the votes of the Justices in Jardines versus Jones. We also discussed the Oliver case involving open fields. We then saw what arguments we could anticipate that the Jardines dissenters would make. The assignment for Tuesday 9/23 is to read the entire Jardines opinion handout. Be prepared to discuss (but you don't need to outline) the concurring opinion. Outline the dissenting opinion, following the format of the model outline I distributed today. This outline will not be handed in or graded, but it will be the practice in this format before I assign the outline that will be graded.
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
September 16, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 9/16, I distributed one handout, selections from the Maine Sentencing Statute. We first went over the Introductory material in the text, talking specifically about procedural v. substantive legitimacy, legal v. equitable remedies, and common law v. enacted law. We then began our discussion of Miller v. Alabama. We went over the text of the 8th Amendment. We also went over proper citation form and order of the parties for U.S. Supreme Court decisions. We talked about three previous 8th Amendment cases, Atkins, Roper and Graham. We went over the difference between concurring in the judgment and concurring in the opinion, and the nine current members of the U.S. Supreme Court. We'll begin on Thursday with the majority opinions in Miller, and look also at the concurring and dissenting opinions in the case. The assignment for Thursday 9/18 is to review Miller, and also to read today's handout, the Maine Sentencing Statute.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 9/16, we first went over the three definitional questions posed in the 4th Amendment: "persons, houses papers, and effects"; "search or seizure", and "unreasonable". We reviewed their resolution in Katz. I discussed two previous cases dealing with tracking vehicles, U.S. v. Knotts and U.S. v. Karo. I ran through the nine current Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. We then went through the three opinions in Jones, discussing the different approaches of the majority and concurrence, as well as Sotomayor's view. We also discussed the questions not addressed in Jones, in terms of reasonableness, warrants, probable cause, and reasonable suspicion. The assignment for Thursday 9/18 is to read through p. 480 of the text.
In class today, Tuesday 9/16, I distributed one handout, selections from the Maine Sentencing Statute. We first went over the Introductory material in the text, talking specifically about procedural v. substantive legitimacy, legal v. equitable remedies, and common law v. enacted law. We then began our discussion of Miller v. Alabama. We went over the text of the 8th Amendment. We also went over proper citation form and order of the parties for U.S. Supreme Court decisions. We talked about three previous 8th Amendment cases, Atkins, Roper and Graham. We went over the difference between concurring in the judgment and concurring in the opinion, and the nine current members of the U.S. Supreme Court. We'll begin on Thursday with the majority opinions in Miller, and look also at the concurring and dissenting opinions in the case. The assignment for Thursday 9/18 is to review Miller, and also to read today's handout, the Maine Sentencing Statute.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 9/16, we first went over the three definitional questions posed in the 4th Amendment: "persons, houses papers, and effects"; "search or seizure", and "unreasonable". We reviewed their resolution in Katz. I discussed two previous cases dealing with tracking vehicles, U.S. v. Knotts and U.S. v. Karo. I ran through the nine current Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. We then went through the three opinions in Jones, discussing the different approaches of the majority and concurrence, as well as Sotomayor's view. We also discussed the questions not addressed in Jones, in terms of reasonableness, warrants, probable cause, and reasonable suspicion. The assignment for Thursday 9/18 is to read through p. 480 of the text.
Thursday, September 11, 2014
September 11, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 9/11, we first went over the concept of authority. We looked at primary authority and secondary authority, and then divided primary authority into mandatory and persuasive authority. We also expanded out previous discussion of citation form to include the four ages of Maine citation form, as well as citations from other states. We also discussed the hierarchy of enacted law (constitutions and statutes, federal and state). We went through the Judy Harrison BDN article regarding Ormand Alley and discussed several ways in which statements in the article might be either incorrect or at least misleading. We went over the engagement ring case, O'Brien v. Hudock, focusing on the level of Court that decided the case, and the authority cited by the Court for its statements of law. The assignment for Tuesday 9/16 is to read in the text through p. 23.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 9/11, I first went over Alito's concurrence in the Riley case. We then discussed conflicts between the Maine Attorney General and Governor that can arise under under system of constitutional officers. We went through the Katz case, going over the previous tests of whether there was a "search" and Katz's revised question regarding that question, as well as whether a search was "unreasonable". We went over Harlan's concurrence, and discussed the difference between subjective and objective tests. Finally we went over Black's dissent. The assignment for Tuesday 9/16 is to read through p. 475 of the text.
In class today, Thursday 9/11, we first went over the concept of authority. We looked at primary authority and secondary authority, and then divided primary authority into mandatory and persuasive authority. We also expanded out previous discussion of citation form to include the four ages of Maine citation form, as well as citations from other states. We also discussed the hierarchy of enacted law (constitutions and statutes, federal and state). We went through the Judy Harrison BDN article regarding Ormand Alley and discussed several ways in which statements in the article might be either incorrect or at least misleading. We went over the engagement ring case, O'Brien v. Hudock, focusing on the level of Court that decided the case, and the authority cited by the Court for its statements of law. The assignment for Tuesday 9/16 is to read in the text through p. 23.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 9/11, I first went over Alito's concurrence in the Riley case. We then discussed conflicts between the Maine Attorney General and Governor that can arise under under system of constitutional officers. We went through the Katz case, going over the previous tests of whether there was a "search" and Katz's revised question regarding that question, as well as whether a search was "unreasonable". We went over Harlan's concurrence, and discussed the difference between subjective and objective tests. Finally we went over Black's dissent. The assignment for Tuesday 9/16 is to read through p. 475 of the text.
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
September 9, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 9/9, we finished off our discussion of the Haworth case. We went through the remainder of the defendants' contentions, and how the Court dealt with each one. We also talked about mistakes by the trial judge, the Feigons' attorney and Haworth's attorney. Along the way, we discussed the legal meaning of "privilege" and "malice", the questions of who has the burden of proof (plaintiff or defendant), what that burden consists of (beyond reasonable doubt, clear and convincing, preponderance of the evidence), and the levels of mental culpability (intent, knowledge, recklessness, negligence). On Thursday we will finally review the BDN article on Ormand Alley, and then go over O'Brien v. Hudock and the previously assigned pp. 1-15 of the text. We will also talk about the "Restatement"and types of authority. There is no additional assignment for Thursday 9/11 other than to review those materials, but you could, as time permits, read through p. 23 of the text.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 9/9, we finished our discussion of the Riley case. We went over the nature of the balancing test for reasonableness (limited to exceptions to the warrant requirement), alternative arguments by the governments that were short of a Robinson-type blanket exception, and then the overall rationale of the Court's reading of the 4th Amendment. We began looking at the textbook, and I reviewed the county District Attorney and state Attorney General positions. We will begin on Thursday with an illustration of our Maine system in which the Attorney General and Governor may hold different political perspectives. We will then go on Thursday to discuss Katz, previously assigned in the text. There is no additional assignment for Thursday 9/11 other than to review the text materials, but you could, as time permits, read through p. 475 of the text (Jones).
In class today, Tuesday 9/9, we finished off our discussion of the Haworth case. We went through the remainder of the defendants' contentions, and how the Court dealt with each one. We also talked about mistakes by the trial judge, the Feigons' attorney and Haworth's attorney. Along the way, we discussed the legal meaning of "privilege" and "malice", the questions of who has the burden of proof (plaintiff or defendant), what that burden consists of (beyond reasonable doubt, clear and convincing, preponderance of the evidence), and the levels of mental culpability (intent, knowledge, recklessness, negligence). On Thursday we will finally review the BDN article on Ormand Alley, and then go over O'Brien v. Hudock and the previously assigned pp. 1-15 of the text. We will also talk about the "Restatement"and types of authority. There is no additional assignment for Thursday 9/11 other than to review those materials, but you could, as time permits, read through p. 23 of the text.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 9/9, we finished our discussion of the Riley case. We went over the nature of the balancing test for reasonableness (limited to exceptions to the warrant requirement), alternative arguments by the governments that were short of a Robinson-type blanket exception, and then the overall rationale of the Court's reading of the 4th Amendment. We began looking at the textbook, and I reviewed the county District Attorney and state Attorney General positions. We will begin on Thursday with an illustration of our Maine system in which the Attorney General and Governor may hold different political perspectives. We will then go on Thursday to discuss Katz, previously assigned in the text. There is no additional assignment for Thursday 9/11 other than to review the text materials, but you could, as time permits, read through p. 475 of the text (Jones).
Thursday, September 4, 2014
September 4, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today. Thursday 9/4 I distributed one handout, the engagement ring case of O'Brien v. Hudock. After I took pictures of the class we launched into our study of Haworth v. Feigon. We started by going over Maine case citation form (at least as it was before 1997), and the Maine and U.S. Supreme Court practice in terms of listing the order of the parties in the case name. We went through the parties in the case, the cause of action, and the prior proceedings. We got through the first three of the appellants' contentions, and we will pick up on Tuesday with the fourth contention, conditional privilege--I(C). Along the way, we also went over the concepts of questions of fact versus questions of law, the difference between a holding in the case versus dictum, and the state of Maine Court organization. The plan for Tuesday is to finish up with the Feigons' contentions, and then look at the BDN article about Coach Alley. The additional assignment for Tuesday 9/9 is to read the O'Brien case, and to read pp. 1-15 of the text.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, 9/4 we began our discussion of the Riley case. We started with a review of the Chimel and Robinson cases that were the primary precedent to which the Court looked. I went over the votes in those two cases, and we saw how the differing results in the two cases made sense to only one Justice. We then looked at Section III of the opinion, looking at the the relationship between the "unreasonable" standard in the first part of the 4th Amendment and the warrant requirement in the second section. We discussed the value of a warrant, the various exceptions to the warrant requirement, and how the state interests in allowing warrantless searches need to be tethered to the interests listed in Chimel. We saw how the Court dealt with the state's two interests. Along the way we went over the difference between dictum and the holding of a case; common law versus enacted law; and the options of following, distinguishing, or overruling precedent. We will pick up on Tuesday with Section III(B) of the Riley opinion. The additional assignment for Tuesday 9/9 is to read and prepare to discuss pp. 459-471 of the text.
In class today. Thursday 9/4 I distributed one handout, the engagement ring case of O'Brien v. Hudock. After I took pictures of the class we launched into our study of Haworth v. Feigon. We started by going over Maine case citation form (at least as it was before 1997), and the Maine and U.S. Supreme Court practice in terms of listing the order of the parties in the case name. We went through the parties in the case, the cause of action, and the prior proceedings. We got through the first three of the appellants' contentions, and we will pick up on Tuesday with the fourth contention, conditional privilege--I(C). Along the way, we also went over the concepts of questions of fact versus questions of law, the difference between a holding in the case versus dictum, and the state of Maine Court organization. The plan for Tuesday is to finish up with the Feigons' contentions, and then look at the BDN article about Coach Alley. The additional assignment for Tuesday 9/9 is to read the O'Brien case, and to read pp. 1-15 of the text.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, 9/4 we began our discussion of the Riley case. We started with a review of the Chimel and Robinson cases that were the primary precedent to which the Court looked. I went over the votes in those two cases, and we saw how the differing results in the two cases made sense to only one Justice. We then looked at Section III of the opinion, looking at the the relationship between the "unreasonable" standard in the first part of the 4th Amendment and the warrant requirement in the second section. We discussed the value of a warrant, the various exceptions to the warrant requirement, and how the state interests in allowing warrantless searches need to be tethered to the interests listed in Chimel. We saw how the Court dealt with the state's two interests. Along the way we went over the difference between dictum and the holding of a case; common law versus enacted law; and the options of following, distinguishing, or overruling precedent. We will pick up on Tuesday with Section III(B) of the Riley opinion. The additional assignment for Tuesday 9/9 is to read and prepare to discuss pp. 459-471 of the text.
Tuesday, September 2, 2014
September 2, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 9/2 I distributed four handouts: the syllabus, an article from the Bangor Daily News about the Ormand Alley controversy, the Maine Supreme Court decision of Haworth v. Feigon, and some questions for you to consider as you read the BDN article and the Haworth case. We went over the Syllabus, and then the basics of the Alley situation. We specifically discussed the difference between enacted law versus common law, the burden of proof, the concept of causes of action, and the difference between criminal law and civil law. The assignment for Thursday 9/4 is to read all of the handouts, using the questions page to guide your reading of the Haworth opinion (not handed in or graded).
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 9/2 I distributed three handouts: the syllabus, the Riley v. California U.S. Supreme Court opinion, and the format for making an outline for the Riley opinion. We went over the Syllabus, and then began a discussion of "Criminal Due Process". We went through the text of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments, and also discussed the extension of these federal protections as state protections as well (through the 14th amendment). I introduced the situation of the Riley and Wurie cases and gave a brief overview of the outline format that I'm looking for. The assignment for Thursday 9/4 is to read Riley and try your hand at outlining the case (not handed in or graded).
In class today, Tuesday 9/2 I distributed four handouts: the syllabus, an article from the Bangor Daily News about the Ormand Alley controversy, the Maine Supreme Court decision of Haworth v. Feigon, and some questions for you to consider as you read the BDN article and the Haworth case. We went over the Syllabus, and then the basics of the Alley situation. We specifically discussed the difference between enacted law versus common law, the burden of proof, the concept of causes of action, and the difference between criminal law and civil law. The assignment for Thursday 9/4 is to read all of the handouts, using the questions page to guide your reading of the Haworth opinion (not handed in or graded).
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 9/2 I distributed three handouts: the syllabus, the Riley v. California U.S. Supreme Court opinion, and the format for making an outline for the Riley opinion. We went over the Syllabus, and then began a discussion of "Criminal Due Process". We went through the text of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments, and also discussed the extension of these federal protections as state protections as well (through the 14th amendment). I introduced the situation of the Riley and Wurie cases and gave a brief overview of the outline format that I'm looking for. The assignment for Thursday 9/4 is to read Riley and try your hand at outlining the case (not handed in or graded).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)