POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 10/30, I distributed two handouts, one an article about the history of the Supreme Court's death penalty decisions, and the other a set of Maine statutes (to go with the Mobbley and Holland cases). We worked our way through the Gregg v. Georgia opinions, paying particular attention to the different questions asked by the three opinions to determine whether capital punishment is cruel and unusual. The assignment for Tuesday is to read and prepare to discuss through p. 67 of the text, as well as the two handouts.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 10/30, we began by finishing up our discussion of Mapp v. Ohio. We looked at both the majority opinion, and, briefly, the concurring and dissenting opinions. We then went over U.S. v. Leon, and saw how the standard set in Mapp was eroded in the case of warrants issued without probable cause. The assignment for Tuesday 11/4 is to read and prepare to discuss through p. 517 (Hudson and Herring)
Thursday, October 30, 2014
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
October 28, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 10/28, I first handed back the exams, and we went over them. We then went over the last case in Chapter 1 of the text, Suggs v. Norris. The assignment for Thursday 10/30 is to read and prepare to discuss through p. 59 in the text (Gregg v. Georgia).
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 10/28, I first handed back the exams, and we went over them. We then began going over Mapp v. Ohio, getting as far as how the factual underpinnings of Wolf v. Colorado had been eroded. We will finish that discussion of Mapp on Thursday. The assignment for Thursday 10/30 is to read and prepare to discuss through p. 509 (U.S. v. Leon).
In class today, Tuesday 10/28, I first handed back the exams, and we went over them. We then went over the last case in Chapter 1 of the text, Suggs v. Norris. The assignment for Thursday 10/30 is to read and prepare to discuss through p. 59 in the text (Gregg v. Georgia).
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 10/28, I first handed back the exams, and we went over them. We then began going over Mapp v. Ohio, getting as far as how the factual underpinnings of Wolf v. Colorado had been eroded. We will finish that discussion of Mapp on Thursday. The assignment for Thursday 10/30 is to read and prepare to discuss through p. 509 (U.S. v. Leon).
Thursday, October 23, 2014
October 23, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 10/23, the class took Exam #1. I plan to hand those exams back and go over them on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/28 is to review from the text Suggs v. Norris, previously assigned.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 10/23, the class took Exam #1. I plan to hand those exams back and go over them on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/28 is to read in the text through p. 504 (Mapp v. Ohio).
In class today, Thursday 10/23, the class took Exam #1. I plan to hand those exams back and go over them on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/28 is to review from the text Suggs v. Norris, previously assigned.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 10/23, the class took Exam #1. I plan to hand those exams back and go over them on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/28 is to read in the text through p. 504 (Mapp v. Ohio).
Tuesday, October 21, 2014
October 21, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 10/21, I distributed one handout, the Johnson Comment Key. I also handed back the Johnson case briefs, and we briefly went over them. We then finished our discussion of Katko v. Briney, both the majority and the dissenting opinions. Finally we went through the Maine statutory handout regarding use of force in defense of premises. We did not cover Suggs v. Norris, previously assigned, so that will not be on the exam. The assignment for Thursday 10/23 is to prepare for Exam #1 (on Thursday). The exam is open-book and open-note. If you are missing any handouts, let me know before Thursday. If you have an emergency and cannot make the exam, make sure to contact me asap.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 10/21, we first finished our discussion of Safford v, Redding. In addition to going over the material in the text, we also went over the concept of qualified immunity and how it applied in that case. We then went over Terry v. Ohio, which actually had set the stage for many of the later cases that we studied so far this semester. The assignment for Thursday 10/23 is to prepare for Exam #1 (on Thursday). The exam is open-book and open-note. If you are missing any handouts, let me know before Thursday. If you have an emergency and cannot make the exam, make sure to contact me asap.
In class today, Tuesday 10/21, I distributed one handout, the Johnson Comment Key. I also handed back the Johnson case briefs, and we briefly went over them. We then finished our discussion of Katko v. Briney, both the majority and the dissenting opinions. Finally we went through the Maine statutory handout regarding use of force in defense of premises. We did not cover Suggs v. Norris, previously assigned, so that will not be on the exam. The assignment for Thursday 10/23 is to prepare for Exam #1 (on Thursday). The exam is open-book and open-note. If you are missing any handouts, let me know before Thursday. If you have an emergency and cannot make the exam, make sure to contact me asap.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 10/21, we first finished our discussion of Safford v, Redding. In addition to going over the material in the text, we also went over the concept of qualified immunity and how it applied in that case. We then went over Terry v. Ohio, which actually had set the stage for many of the later cases that we studied so far this semester. The assignment for Thursday 10/23 is to prepare for Exam #1 (on Thursday). The exam is open-book and open-note. If you are missing any handouts, let me know before Thursday. If you have an emergency and cannot make the exam, make sure to contact me asap.
Thursday, October 16, 2014
October 16, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 10/16, I collected the Johnson case briefs, and then we went over them. I plan to grade them this weekend, and return them on Tuesday. Along the way, we went over the varying levels by which some one has to be convinced, from beyond a reasonable doubt all the way to a suspicionless dragnet. The class then took a sample test, in preparation for the first exam, which will be on Thursday 10/23. On Tuesday, we'll continue with the Katko case and the Maine statutory handout, previously assigned. The additional homework for Tuesday 10/21 is to read and prepare to discuss through the end of the chapter Suggs v. Norris).
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 10/16, the class took a sample test, in preparation for the first exam, which will be on Thursday 10/23. We then completed our review of the Gant case, exploring how both the majority and dissent believed that they were being faithful to Belton. We began our discussion of Redding, getting to the right standard to use for searches in the school setting. We will pick up at that point on Tuesday. Along the way we reviewed both the three standard questions regarding 4th Amendment violations (was there one; does the evidence get suppressed; can the victim successfully sue) as well as the levels of suspicion, from probable cause down to a suspicionless dragnet. The additional homework for Tuesday 10/21 is to read and prepare to discuss through p. 497 of the text (Terry).
In class today, Thursday 10/16, I collected the Johnson case briefs, and then we went over them. I plan to grade them this weekend, and return them on Tuesday. Along the way, we went over the varying levels by which some one has to be convinced, from beyond a reasonable doubt all the way to a suspicionless dragnet. The class then took a sample test, in preparation for the first exam, which will be on Thursday 10/23. On Tuesday, we'll continue with the Katko case and the Maine statutory handout, previously assigned. The additional homework for Tuesday 10/21 is to read and prepare to discuss through the end of the chapter Suggs v. Norris).
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 10/16, the class took a sample test, in preparation for the first exam, which will be on Thursday 10/23. We then completed our review of the Gant case, exploring how both the majority and dissent believed that they were being faithful to Belton. We began our discussion of Redding, getting to the right standard to use for searches in the school setting. We will pick up at that point on Tuesday. Along the way we reviewed both the three standard questions regarding 4th Amendment violations (was there one; does the evidence get suppressed; can the victim successfully sue) as well as the levels of suspicion, from probable cause down to a suspicionless dragnet. The additional homework for Tuesday 10/21 is to read and prepare to discuss through p. 497 of the text (Terry).
Thursday, October 9, 2014
October 9, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 10/9, I distributed two handouts: my version of the Katko case brief, and the Maine statute regarding use of force in defense of premises. We first went over aspects of the Johnson case brief, and I corrected my statement from last Tuesday (I had mistakenly said that there was a 4th Amendment issue raised by Johnson in the Maine Supreme Court). We discussed the search conducted by the police, and the claims made by Johnson. I went over a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court, that clarified the right under the U.S. Constitution (both 4th and 5th Amendments) for the police to demand that people identify themselves to the police. We then turned back to the textbook and the Katko case. We discussed the elements of the case brief, up to the Issues, which is where we'll pick up when we rejoin Katko. We also went over the secondary authority in the case versus the primary authority, and mandatory versus persuasive authority. There is no school next Tuesday 10/14. The assignment for Thursday 10/16 is to finish work on your Johnson case briefs, due at the beginning of class on Thursday, 10/16. In addition, review Katko, and read the Maine statutory handout. I also announced that the date for our first exam will be Thursday 10/23.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 10/9, I handed back the Navarette outlines, and we briefly discussed them. I also announced that the date for our first exam will be Thursday 10/23. We went over the two current Supreme Court cases about which I previously distributed handouts, Heien v. North Carolina and Rodriguez v. U.S.. As part of that discussion, we also discussed three levels of leeway given to the police: the existence of constitutional rights themselves; the use of the exclusionary rule; and the good faith immunity defense of police against suits alleging constitutional violations. We also talked about the idea of the "fruits of the poisonous tree". We then moved on to the Gant case from the text, getting up to Alito's dissent in the case, which is where we'll pick up when we next meet on Thursday 10/16. The assignment for Thursday 10/16 is to read and prepare to discuss through p. 492 of the text (the Safford case) (there is no school next Tuesday 10/14).
In class today, Thursday 10/9, I distributed two handouts: my version of the Katko case brief, and the Maine statute regarding use of force in defense of premises. We first went over aspects of the Johnson case brief, and I corrected my statement from last Tuesday (I had mistakenly said that there was a 4th Amendment issue raised by Johnson in the Maine Supreme Court). We discussed the search conducted by the police, and the claims made by Johnson. I went over a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court, that clarified the right under the U.S. Constitution (both 4th and 5th Amendments) for the police to demand that people identify themselves to the police. We then turned back to the textbook and the Katko case. We discussed the elements of the case brief, up to the Issues, which is where we'll pick up when we rejoin Katko. We also went over the secondary authority in the case versus the primary authority, and mandatory versus persuasive authority. There is no school next Tuesday 10/14. The assignment for Thursday 10/16 is to finish work on your Johnson case briefs, due at the beginning of class on Thursday, 10/16. In addition, review Katko, and read the Maine statutory handout. I also announced that the date for our first exam will be Thursday 10/23.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 10/9, I handed back the Navarette outlines, and we briefly discussed them. I also announced that the date for our first exam will be Thursday 10/23. We went over the two current Supreme Court cases about which I previously distributed handouts, Heien v. North Carolina and Rodriguez v. U.S.. As part of that discussion, we also discussed three levels of leeway given to the police: the existence of constitutional rights themselves; the use of the exclusionary rule; and the good faith immunity defense of police against suits alleging constitutional violations. We also talked about the idea of the "fruits of the poisonous tree". We then moved on to the Gant case from the text, getting up to Alito's dissent in the case, which is where we'll pick up when we next meet on Thursday 10/16. The assignment for Thursday 10/16 is to read and prepare to discuss through p. 492 of the text (the Safford case) (there is no school next Tuesday 10/14).
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
October 7, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 10/7, I distributed three handouts: the case brief assignment (copied below), the Johnson case that you'll be briefing, and some hypotheticals giving variations from the Speelman decision. I went over the requirements of the assignment, and also gave a brief introduction to the issues raised in Johnson. We then went back through Speelman, finishing up the issues that the Court addressed and how they were resolved. We also went over the hypotheticals, which were basically a way of testing the scope of the holding that we wrote in the Speelman case brief. On Thursday, we will begin by going over any questions that you have about the Johnson assignment. We will then take up the Katko case, previously assigned. The assignmnet for Thursday 10/9 is to review Katko, and to begin work on the Johnson case brief assignment.
Assignment due Thursday October 16th, 2014
The assignment (graded) is to do a Case Brief of the case of State v, Johnson, 2014 ME 83, _____ A.3d____.
Brief all of the issues that you determine that the Court ruled on. Remember that the purpose of the brief is to be useful. Check your holdings to make sure that they give the most useful rules possible. Mere conclusory facts just tell us who won and who lost, but not what circumstances determine the winner and loser.
Follow the format from the Sample Briefs that I’ve distributed. Note especially that, after the “Issue” is composed, the “Facts” and “Holding” are copied and pasted. Everything that you put into the Fact section should appear exactly in your Issue and Holding sections as well. Your Issue and Holding sections should be identical to each other, except that the issue is a question, and the Holding is the answer to that question. Your briefs will be evaluated on the format, as well as the specific content.
Please make two copies of your brief, 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 brief. 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 Thursday 10/16, you should still e-mail me your brief by the beginning of class time. If you do that, you will not have any grade deducted from your grade for the brief. 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.
Remember to work by yourselves; do not collaborate. Do not show your work to anyone else; do not look at anyone else’s work.
IMPORTANT: If you e-mail your brief to me, I will reply to confirm that I have received your assignment. If I do not reply, then I have not received the assignment.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 10/7, I distributed three handouts: my version of the Navarette outline, and two articles about current U.S. Supreme Court cases. I collected your Navarette outlines and we went over them. I plan to grade them and return them on Thursday. In our discussion, we also went over the levels of persuasion, from beyond a reasonable doubt all the way down to suspicionless, and we went over mental states of actions, from intent all the way down to strict liability. The assignment for Thursday 10/9 is to read the two handouts about current Supreme Court cases, and to read in the textbook through the Gant case (pp. 480-488).
In class today, Tuesday 10/7, I distributed three handouts: the case brief assignment (copied below), the Johnson case that you'll be briefing, and some hypotheticals giving variations from the Speelman decision. I went over the requirements of the assignment, and also gave a brief introduction to the issues raised in Johnson. We then went back through Speelman, finishing up the issues that the Court addressed and how they were resolved. We also went over the hypotheticals, which were basically a way of testing the scope of the holding that we wrote in the Speelman case brief. On Thursday, we will begin by going over any questions that you have about the Johnson assignment. We will then take up the Katko case, previously assigned. The assignmnet for Thursday 10/9 is to review Katko, and to begin work on the Johnson case brief assignment.
Assignment due Thursday October 16th, 2014
The assignment (graded) is to do a Case Brief of the case of State v, Johnson, 2014 ME 83, _____ A.3d____.
Brief all of the issues that you determine that the Court ruled on. Remember that the purpose of the brief is to be useful. Check your holdings to make sure that they give the most useful rules possible. Mere conclusory facts just tell us who won and who lost, but not what circumstances determine the winner and loser.
Follow the format from the Sample Briefs that I’ve distributed. Note especially that, after the “Issue” is composed, the “Facts” and “Holding” are copied and pasted. Everything that you put into the Fact section should appear exactly in your Issue and Holding sections as well. Your Issue and Holding sections should be identical to each other, except that the issue is a question, and the Holding is the answer to that question. Your briefs will be evaluated on the format, as well as the specific content.
Please make two copies of your brief, 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 brief. 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 Thursday 10/16, you should still e-mail me your brief by the beginning of class time. If you do that, you will not have any grade deducted from your grade for the brief. 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.
Remember to work by yourselves; do not collaborate. Do not show your work to anyone else; do not look at anyone else’s work.
IMPORTANT: If you e-mail your brief to me, I will reply to confirm that I have received your assignment. If I do not reply, then I have not received the assignment.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Tuesday 10/7, I distributed three handouts: my version of the Navarette outline, and two articles about current U.S. Supreme Court cases. I collected your Navarette outlines and we went over them. I plan to grade them and return them on Thursday. In our discussion, we also went over the levels of persuasion, from beyond a reasonable doubt all the way down to suspicionless, and we went over mental states of actions, from intent all the way down to strict liability. The assignment for Thursday 10/9 is to read the two handouts about current Supreme Court cases, and to read in the textbook through the Gant case (pp. 480-488).
Thursday, October 2, 2014
October 2, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 10/2, I distributed one handout, my version of the Speelman case brief. We first finished off our discussion of Glucksberg, going over the legitimate interests that Washington has in criminalizing assisted suicide, and also talking briefly about Justice Souter's concurring opinion. We then began our discussion of Speelman, getting to the part of the brief in which the Housing Authority claimed that the previous Washington Supreme Court case, State v. Nelson, mandated that their notice was good enough. We will pick up at that point on Tuesday. The additional assignment for Tuesday 10/7 is to do a case brief of the next case in the text, Katko v. Briney (through p. 43 of the text). Katko is again a practice case brief, but my plan is to give you the first graded case brief assignment on Tuesday 10/7, to be due Thursday 10/16.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 10/2,we went through the majority decision in Navarette, including some discussion of how it might fit into outline form. I also went into some more depth about Alabama v. White and Florida v. J.L., particularly the vote breakdown and dissenting view in White. The assignment for Tuesday 10/7 is to finish your Navarette outline, due at the beginning of class on Tuesday.
In class today, Thursday 10/2, I distributed one handout, my version of the Speelman case brief. We first finished off our discussion of Glucksberg, going over the legitimate interests that Washington has in criminalizing assisted suicide, and also talking briefly about Justice Souter's concurring opinion. We then began our discussion of Speelman, getting to the part of the brief in which the Housing Authority claimed that the previous Washington Supreme Court case, State v. Nelson, mandated that their notice was good enough. We will pick up at that point on Tuesday. The additional assignment for Tuesday 10/7 is to do a case brief of the next case in the text, Katko v. Briney (through p. 43 of the text). Katko is again a practice case brief, but my plan is to give you the first graded case brief assignment on Tuesday 10/7, to be due Thursday 10/16.
POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 10/2,we went through the majority decision in Navarette, including some discussion of how it might fit into outline form. I also went into some more depth about Alabama v. White and Florida v. J.L., particularly the vote breakdown and dissenting view in White. The assignment for Tuesday 10/7 is to finish your Navarette outline, due at the beginning of class on Tuesday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)