October 3, 2019

POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 10/3, I distributed 2 handouts: my version of the Katko case brief, and the Maine constitutional provision and statutory laws regarding residency for voting purposes. We went over the definition of residency again (allowing me to correct an incorrect statement that I had made on Tuesday). We then went back and finished our collective case brief of Katko. We went over the different types of authority cited in Katko, and I discussed primary authority versus secondary authority, with primary authority divided into mandatory authority versus persuasive authority. I also expanded the treatment of authority to include not only follow, distinguish, and overrule, but also to extend. We got as far in authority as Hooker v. Miller, which is where we'll pick up next Tuesday. Also, I let the class know that I plan to distribute our first graded case brief on Tuesday, 10/8, with a due date of 10/17.
The assignment for Tuesday 10/8 is to review the rest of the authority cited in Katko, review the handout of Maine's Defense of Premises statute (figuring out how the facts of Katko would have come out under Maine's criminal statute), and read in the text the rest of Chapter 1, including Suggs v. Norris.




POS 484 CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
In class today, Thursday 10/3, I first clarified one aspect of the Hester outline due next Thursday, namely that the class should ignore all references to the issue of sentencing enhancement. You're outlining just the suppression issue, nothing about sentencing enhancement. We then made a detour to talk about two of the cases that will be argued before SCOTUS on Monday, the first day of the new session. We talked about Kahler v. Kansas, about the constitutional requirement for an insanity defense, and Ramos v. Louisiana, about the incorporation of the requirement for unanimous juries as protections against the states as well as against the federal government. We then went into the textbook. We started with Terry v. Ohio, and saw how there could be a seizure that was short of an arrest. We then went back to Hodari, and saw how the Court defined the concept of a seizure based on the response to a show of authority, rather than just the show of authority itself.
The assignment for Tuesday 10/8 is to read in the textbook up to p. 104 (including Wardlow), prepare to discuss the "You Decide" 3.5 on p. 87. and continue work on your Hester outlines, due Thursday 10/10.