This collection of original essays surveys the evolution of sentencing policies and practices in Western countries over the past twenty-five years. Contributors address plea-bargaining, community service, electronic monitoring, standards of use of incarceration, and legal perspectives on sentencing policy developments, among other topics. Sentencing and Sanctions in Western Countries provides a range of scholars' and students' excellent cross-national knowledge of sentencing laws and practices, when and why they have changed over time, and with what effects.

This is the first major treatment of the conflict of laws within the UK, a subject often dealt with only incidentally in the main texts on private international law. In particular, the book examines the effect of the UK's changing constitutional arrangements on questions of jurisdiction, choice of law and issues of recognition and enforcement which arise within the UK.
The book offers practical guidance on the applicable rules in intra-UK conflicts situations with sections devoted to forum shopping within the UK, and other procedural matters. A chapter is also included on the impact of EU legislation on intra-UK conflicts, concluding with a discussion on how "Europeanization" might affect the conflict of laws in the UK. There is also coverage of how public policy functions in the conflict of laws. The book's approach to the treatment of intra-UK conflicts is enhanced by a comparative analysis of the recent response of Canada and Australia to, respectively, interprovincial and interstate conflicts.

Lopeman examines the impact advocacy of intentional judicial activism by a justice of a state supreme court can have on establishing the court as a policy maker. He examines the attitudinal model and the judicial role model of decision making and concludes that, while the attitudinal model might describe the decision-making process in the U.S. Supreme Court, the judicial role model better describes decision making in state supreme courts. This judicial role model allows the activist to transform a court into a policy maker.

The traditions, recent history, and biographies of recent justices of the Indiana, West Virginia, and Ohio courts are examined to establish a significant relationship between the presence of an activist advocate justice and active policy making by the courts. These courts' decisions in cases with policy making potential are contrasted with decisions in similar cases of three state supreme courts that did not have an advocate justice. Lopeman argues that the presence of an activist advocate explains a court's transformation to active policy making, and that other apparent explanations are insufficient. He emphasizes that the motives of an activist advocate are likely to determine the permanence of policy making in the court. This volume is an important resource for political scientists, legal scholars, and other researchers involved with judicial decision making, state politics, and state constitutional law.

The public image of judges has been stuck in a time warp; they are invariably depicted in the media - and derided in public bars up and down the country - as 'privately educated Oxbridge types', usually 'out-of-touch', and more often than not as 'old men'. These and other stereotypes - the judge as a pervert, the judge as a right-wing monster - have dogged the judiciary long since any of them ceased to have any basis in fact. Indeed the limited research that was permitted in the 1960s and 1970s tended to reinforce several of these stereotypes. Moreover, occasional high profile incidents in the courts, elaborated with the help of satirists such as 'Private Eye' and 'Monty Python', have ensured that the 'old white Tory judge' caricature not only survives but has come to be viewed as incontestable. Since the late 1980s the judiciary has changed, largely as a result of the introduction of training and new and more transparent methods of recruitment and appointment. But how much has it changed, and what are the courts like after decades of judicial reform? Given unprecedented access to the whole range of courts - from magistrates' courts to the Supreme Court - Penny Darbyshire spent seven years researching the judges, accompanying them in their daily work, listening to their conversations, observing their handling of cases and the people who come before them, and asking them frank and searching questions about their lives, careers and ambitions. What emerges is without doubt the most revealing and compelling picture of the modern judiciary in England and Wales ever seen. From it we learn that not only do the old stereotypes not hold, but that modern 'baby boomer' judges are more representative of the people they serve and that the reforms are working. But this new book also gives an unvarnished glimpse of the modern courtroom which shows a legal system under stress, lacking resources but facing an ever-increasing caseload. This book will be essential reading for anyone wishing to know about the experience of modern judging, the education, training and professional lives of judges, and the current state of the courts and judiciary in England and Wales.

It has been many years since O. J. Simpson walked free from a downtown Los Angeles courtroom. For many, it was the demolition of the fundamental principle of right and wrong, and many debated the deficiencies of the American justice system. Since then, we have witnessed the Casey Anthony case, and others, that remind us of issues unaddressed and questions unanswered. In Fixing the Engine of Justice, author David Tunno presents the symptoms of a defective jury system and offers comprehensive, intelligent, and thought-provoking solutions. Tunno, a trial consultant for more than twenty years, has studied and researched key trials and has gleaned stories from his personal experiences to show a system beset with representation issues, incompetence, bias, misconduct, and lack of support and public perception based on misconceptions. He analyzes the flaws in the jury selection process, its lack of effectiveness, and the ways in which it contributes to the delivery of justice. Often humorous and irreverent, Fixing the Engine of Justice offers a diagnosis of the problems and a list of needed repairs to the American legal system. With the prime focus on juries, Tunno also takes aim at judges, attorneys, and other issues relevant to the health of the system.

This book provides the first in-depth analysis of a wide variety of legal problems and policy issues that directly involve the judiciary, together with a discussion of the historical context of these issues and their current implications. The methods of nominating, appointing, and electing justices, and the provisions and prohibitions governing judicial compensation, are first examined. Grounds for judicial disqualification are presented, and the regulation of political activity on the part of judges and judicial candidates is considered. Three chapters relating to judicial discipline deal with removal and other disciplinary actions, as well as the criminal and civil liability of judges. The authors focus on both the grounds for imposing discipline and the various methods employed to evaluate and punish alleged misconduct.

This book presents a hotly debated issue concerning the ownership of trust property in China. The book describes various conventional interpretations of Chinese Trust Law submitted by legal scholars and compares diverse approaches regarding the ownership of trust property provided by jurisdictions globally. The book does not directly answer the question "Who is the owner of trust property in China?" Instead, using a social capital perspective, it develops a more practical perspective to explain why Chinese trust business has grown rapidly even in lack of legal certainty regarding the location of ownership of trust property. The book also further predicts under what conditions is the time ripe to clarify the location of the ownership of trust property in China. By employing those sociological concepts often used to depict and analyze society, this book outlines the structure of the Chinese trust business and related social relations in different stages, i.e., the current rapid development stage, and the possible transitional stage in the near future. The focus is on how the social network structure affects the behavior of actors (such as the settlor, the trustee, and the beneficiaries, and/or their potential candidates) within the relevant section of Chinese society. The book provides readers with an intensive analysis of the impacts of historical, cultural, and social elements on the legislation and development of trust law in China. It will appeal both to lawyers interested in the Chinese trust business and to comparative law researchers and social scientists.

The effect of modern and communication technology on civil procedure first appeared on the agenda of the conference organized by the International Association of Procedural Law in 1999, verifying Lord Woolf's statement from the 90's, that "IT will not only assist in streamlining and improving our existing systems and process; it is also likely, in due course, itself to be catalyst for radical change as well...."

At the conference in Pecs in the autumn of 2010 participants from three continents and twenty-five countries examined all aspects of the impact of modern information technology on civil procedure beginning with the electronic submission of the application, ranging from electronic service of documents and electronic means of proof supported by modern information technology. In addition to the practical issues they discussed the possible impact of electronic procedures on traditional principles of civil procedure. The conference book contains seven main reports and eleven correferates, the foreword was written by Prof. Peter Gottwald, the President of the International Association of Procedural Law.

This study proposes a multilateralist method of choice of law in order to alleviate the great disarray that currently exists in American choice law. In the early 20th century, there was a fairly-uniform multilateralist method of choice law. In the 1920s and 30s, however, scholars adn courts began to reject this method. Viewed as too mechanical the method sometimes resulted in the choice of law of a state with only a tenuous connection to the controversy. Currently, state courts use four different approached to choice law with numerous material variations. This study rejects these approaches on normative, constitutional, and practical grounds. Instead, it advocates that courts adopt a multilateralist approach to choice of law that is forum- and content-neutral and that respects the rights of both individuals and states. The study also argues that such an approach should satisfy a constitutional standard that requires a court not choose one state's law when another state has a significantly closer connection to controversy.

The proposed method consists of two parts. The first part determines the states that have created legal relations applying to the dispute. When more than one state has created a legal realtions applying to the dispute. When more than one state has created a legal relation that applies to the controversy, the second part adopts the law of the state that had the closest connection. The study then applies the suggested method to numerous choice of law problems.

Although the right to trial by jury is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, in recent years both criminal and civil juries have been criticized as incompetent, biased, and irresponsible. For example, the O.J. Simpson criminal jury's verdict produced a racial divide in opinions about that trial. And many Americans still hold strong views about the jury that awarded millions of dollars to a woman who spilled a cup of McDonald's coffee on herself. It's said that there are "judicial hellholes" where local juries provide "jackpot justice" in medical malpractice and product liability cases with corporate defendants. Are these claims valid? This monumental and comprehensive volume reviews over fifty years of empirical research on civil and criminal juries and returns a verdict that strongly supports the jury system. Rather than relying on anecdotes, Vidmar and Hans-renowned scholars of the jury system-place the jury system in its historical and contemporary context, giving the stories behind important trials while providing fact-based answers to critical questions. How do juries make decisions and how do their verdicts compare to those of trial judges and technical experts? What roles do jury consultants play in influencing trial outcomes? Can juries understand complex expert testimony? Under which circumstances do capital juries decide to sentence a defendant to die? Are juries biased against doctors and big business? Should juries be allowed to give punitive damages? How do juries respond to the insanity defense? Do jurors ignore the law? Finally, the authors consider various suggestions for improving the way that juries are asked to carry out their duties. After briefly comparing the American jury to its counterparts in other nations, they conclude that our jury system, despite occasional problems, is, on balance, fair and democratic, and should remain an indispensable component of the judicial process for the foreseeable future.

It isn't enough to celebrate the death penalty's demise. We must learn from it. When Henry McCollum was condemned to death in 1984 in rural North Carolina, death sentences were commonplace. In 2014, DNA tests set McCollum free. By then, death sentences were as rare as lethal lightning strikes. To most observers this national trend came as a surprise. What changed? Brandon Garrett hand-collected and analyzed national data, looking for causes and implications of this turnaround. End of Its Rope explains what he found, and why the story of who killed the death penalty, and how, can be the catalyst for criminal justice reform. No single factor put the death penalty on the road to extinction, Garrett concludes. Death row exonerations fostered rising awareness of errors in death penalty cases, at the same time that a decline in murder rates eroded law-and-order arguments. Defense lawyers radically improved how they litigate death cases when given adequate resources. More troubling, many states replaced the death penalty with what amounts to a virtual death sentence-life without possibility of parole. Today, the death penalty hangs on in a few scattered counties where prosecutors cling to entrenched habits and patterns of racial bias. The failed death penalty experiment teaches us how inept lawyering, overzealous prosecution, race discrimination, wrongful convictions, and excessive punishments undermine the pursuit of justice. Garrett makes a strong closing case for what a future criminal justice system might look like if these injustices were remedied.

In modern societies, full criminal trials are avoided on many occasions. This book is concerned with mechanisms that either divert from or speed up the proceedings. Koen Vriend argues that the fair trial rights as established by the European Court of Human Rights under Article 6 ECHR provide a normative framework that does not only apply in a full criminal trial, but that it can also be used for diverted and shortened proceedings. He shows that the concept of fairness-as derived from ECtHR case law-is a fundamental principle that underlies all criminal law enforcement. It provides for the appropriate framework to assess whether diverted or shortened proceedings are fair and legitimate. The book is intended for criminal law scholars and practitioners and human rights scholars. Dr. Koen Vriend is a Lecturer of Criminal Law and Criminal Procedural Law at the University of Amsterdam.

JOIN OVER HALF A MILLION STUDENTS WHO CHOSE TO REVISE WITH LAW EXPRESS Revise with the help of the UK's bestselling law revision series. Features: * Review essential cases, statutes, and legal terms before exams. * Assess and approach the subject by using expert advice. * Gain higher marks with tips for advanced thinking and further discussions. * Avoid common pitfalls with Don't be tempted to. * Practice answering sample questions and discover additional resources on the Companion website. www.pearsoned.co.uk/lawexpress

Things are not always as they appear, as Cyril Wecht shows in this behind-the-scenes look at nine famous murder cases. Drawing on police reports, deopsitions, trial testimony, and autopsy reports, he raises important issues and offers fresh perspectives on each case.

These essays, written in honour of retired ECJ judge Pernilla Lindh, reflect on the development of courts and judging in the EU since the founding of the Union. In particular they focus on recent reforms and proposals aimed at further increasing public confidence and democratic accountability throughout the EU judicial system.

This book positions inquiries into the historical abuse of children in care within the context of transitional justice. It examines investigation, apology and redress processes across a range of Western nations to trace the growth of the movement, national particularities and the impact of the work on professionals involved.

Many critics attack federal judges as anti-democratic elitists, activists out of step with the mainstream of American thought. But others argue that judges should stand alone as the ultimate guardians of American values, placing principle before the views of the people. In The Most Democratic Branch, Jeffrey Rosen disagrees with both assertions. Contrary to what interest groups may claim, he contends that, from the days of John Marshall right up to the present, the federal courts by and large have reflected the opinions of the mainstream. More important, he argues that the Supreme Court is most successful when it defers to the constitutional views of the American people, as represented most notably by Congress and the Presidency. And on the rare occasion when they departed from the consensus, the result has often been a disaster. To illustrate, Rosen provides a penetrating look at some of the most important Supreme Court cases in American history-cases involving racial equality, affirmative action, abortion, gay rights and gay marriage, the right to die, electoral disputes, and civil liberties in wartime. Rosen shows that the most notorious constitutional decisions in American history-the ones that have been most strenuously criticized, such as Dred Scott or Roe v. Wade-have gone against mainstream opinion. By contrast, the most successful decisions-from Marbury v. Madison to Brown v. Board of Education-have avoided imposing constitutional principles over the wishes of the people. Rosen concludes that the judiciary works best when it identifies the constitutional principles accepted by a majority of Americans, and enforces them unequivocally as fundamental law. Jeffrey Rosen is one of the most respected legal experts writing today, a regular contributor to The New York Times Magazine and the Legal Affairs Editor of The New Republic. The provocative arguments that he puts forth here are bound to fuel heated debate at a time when the federal judiciary is already the focus of fierce criticism.

A fascinating exploration of the first two Supreme Courts and how they laid the groundwork for the modern-day Court. When the Supreme Court was established in 1789, no other country had a judicial body quite like it. The early justices struggled to give definition to such concepts as "judicial review" and "separation of powers." The early court approached its role in ways that would be startling today, often using its power to support the new government rather than merely serving as an independent arbiter. The Jay-Ellsworth Courts were the first to take up the role of interpreting the constitution, and their approach influenced constitutional debates for the next two centuries. Clearly, this is a book for any reader who wishes to understand how the court was initially set up and how it functioned in our early judicial history. Biographies of key justices such as Oliver Ellsworth, John Marshall, and John Jay Background reference section containing A-Z entries on the people, such as George Washington and John Adams; laws and constitutional provisions, including the First Judiciary Act and Article III; and concepts, such as "judicial review" and "separation of powers," that are important to an understanding of the Jay and Ellsworth Courts

An important contribution to constitutional literature, this collection of ten unpublished decisions by the Warren Court puts the decision making process of the Supreme Court in a new light. By following the major changes that occur in each case from the circulation of tentative majority opinions to the final issuance of opinion, the book portrays how the justices communicate with each other and how they are influenced by each other's arguments. Interpretations and commentaries by the author illuminate the significance of each case and provide insight into the different judicial philosophies and personal styles of the justices. This book will be of substantial value to law schools, law libraries, bar associations, and lawyers practicing in the field of constitutional law.

In the United States, lawyers are very much accountable for their actions--or nonactions. When they represent a client, they have a legal obligation to act professionally, responsibly, and ethically. Unfortunately, all too many lawyers do not live up to these established standards. If you have been victimized by your attorney, legal recourse is available. "How & When to Sue Your Lawyer was designed to help you protect yourself from the effects of legal malpractice. Written in plain English, "How & When to Sue Your Lawyer spells out what you need to know to take appropriate legal action against your attorney. The first part of the book begins by explaining the American Bar Association's categories of malpractice--substantive, administrative, client relations, and intentional wrongs. It next details the "model rules" of professional responsibilities established by both national and state bars. Finally, it discusses the all-important differences between guidelines and actual laws set by legal precedent. The second part of the book explains the steps you must take to establish a solid case against your attorney. From developing the facts to gathering the hard evidence to proving the allegation, it's all here. If you feel that you have lost a case because of your counsel's mismanagement or incompetence, or if you have been taken advantage of financially or sexually by your attorney, "How & When to Sue Your Lawyer will help you gain satisfaction, compensation, and justice.

Prillaman argues that a sound judiciary is critical for building popular support for democracy and laying the foundations for sustainable economic development, but that most Latin American governments have made virtually no progress toward building a more effective judiciary. He shows that the traditional approach to judicial reform is flawed on several levels. Reformers are wrong to focus on a single aspect of the judiciary on the assumption that one reform naturally leads to another. In fact, all aspects of the courts are so closely related that failure to reform one aspect creates a "negative synergy" that ultimately undermines the reformed areas. Instead, a successful reform strategy must simultaneously tackle independence, accountability, access, and efficiency; otherwise, it is virtually assured of failure. As Prillaman points out, judicial reform is not merely a technical process that can be isolated from broader economic and political forces. Rather, it is an inherently political process that will be opposed by forces ranging from politicians accustomed to stocking the courts to judges and court personnel reluctant to accept greater oversight and professional norms. Based on four case studies, Prillaman concludes that failed judicial reforms have led to growing support for mob lynching and vigilante justice that promises to fill the void created by ineffectual courts--ultimately challenging the quality and sustainability of democracy. An invaluable survey for political scientists, students, and researchers involved with democratic consolidation, institution building, and comparative judicial politics in Latin America specifically and the developing world in general.

This textbook provides an overview for students in Criminology and Criminal Justice about the overlap between the criminal justice system and mental health. It provides an accessible overview of basic signs and symptoms of major mental illnesses and size of scope of justice-involved individuals with mental illness. In the United States, the criminal justice system is often the first public service to be in contact with individuals suffering from mental illness or in mental distress. Those with untreated mental illnesses are often at higher risk for committing criminal acts, yet research on this population continues to shed light on common myths - such a prevailing assumption that those with mental illness tend to commit more violent crimes. Law enforcement agents may be called in as first responders for cases of mental distress; and due to a lack of mental health facilities, resources, and pervasive misconceptions about this population, those with mental illness often end up in the corrections system. In this environment, students in Criminology and Criminal Justice are likely to encounter those with mental illness in their future career paths, and need to be prepared for this reality. This timely work covers the roles of each part of the criminal justice system interacting with mentally ill individuals, from law enforcement and first responders, social services, public health services, sentencing and corrections, to release and re-entry. It also covers the crucial topic of mental health for criminal justice professionals, who suffer from high rates of job stress, PTSD, and other mental health issues. The final section of the book includes suggestions for future research. This work will be of interest to students of criminology and criminal justice with an interest in working in the professional sector, as well as those in related fields of sociology, psychology, and public health. It will also be of interest to policy-makers and practitioners already working in the field. The overall goal of this work is to inform, educate, and inspire change.

Is there something distinctive about penology in Europe? Do Europeans think about punishment and penal policy in a different way to people in other parts of the globe? If so, why is this the case and how does it work in practice? This book addresses some major and pressing issues that have been emerging in recent years in the interdisciplinary field of 'European penology', that is, a space where legal scholarship, criminology, sociology and political science meet - or should meet - in order to make sense of punishment in Europe. The chapters in European Penology? have been written by leading scholars in the field and focus in particular on the interaction of European academic penology and national practice with European policies as developed by the Council of Europe and, increasingly, by the European Union.

"Written for a general audience. . . . Excellent. . . . If enough American judges and law professors read his book, some of the silly rules that he criticizes will be discarded."
"--Judge Richard A. Posner, Times Literary Supplement"

"A beautifully written, finely nuanced work, a marvelous comparative constitutional study of criminal procedure that seeks to understand the larger culture."
"--Lawrence Fleischer, New York Law Journal"

"In a cogent, direct argument, Pizzi inveighs against the triumph of the law of unintended consequences over the law of practicality. . . . An important book."
"--Publishers Weekly"

"Pizzi is certainly convincing in his argument that the American trial system is in dire need of overhaul. "
--"Law Society Journal," July 2002 Rodney King. Reginald Denny. O. J. Simpson. Colin Ferguson. Louise Woodward: all names that have cast a spotlight on the deficiencies of the American system of criminal justice. Yet, in the wake of each trial that exposes shocking behavior by trial participants or results in counterintuitive rulingsaoften with perverse resultsathe American public is reassured by the trial bar that the case is not "typical" and that our trial system remains the best in the world.

William T. Pizzi here argues that what the public perceives is in fact exactly what the United States has: a trial system that places far too much emphasis on winning and not nearly enough on truth, one in which the abilities of a lawyer or the composition of a jury may be far more important to the outcome of a case than any evidence.

How has a system on which Americans have lavished enormous amounts of energy, time, and money been allowed todegenerate into one so profoundly flawed?

Acting as an informal tour guide, and bringing to bear his experiences as both insider and outsider, prosecutor and academic, Pizzi here exposes the structural faultlines of our trial system and its paralyzing obsession with procedure, specifically the ways in which lawyers are permitted to dominate trials, the system's preference for weak judges, and the absurdities of plea bargaining. By comparing and contrasting the U.S. system with that of a host of other countries, Trials Without Truth provides a clear-headed, wide-ranging critique of what ails the criminal justice systemaand a prescription for how it can be fixed.

The Research Handbook on Legal Pluralism and EU Law explores the phenomenon of overlapping legal systems within the European Union, the nature of their interactions, and how they deal with the difficult question of the legal hierarchy between them. The contributors reflect on the history, sociology and legal scholarship on constitutional and legal pluralism, and develop this further in the light of the challenges currently facing the EU. Addressing pluralism within policy areas such as EMU, migration, and external relations, and applying different perspectives - from the constitutionalist to the Foucauldian - this diverse collection of thinkers about EU law ask whether a pluralist perspective is part of the problem or part of the solution. Contributors offer both critical and positive assessments of the value of pluralist thinking in the EU whilst addressing major issues facing the EU now - Brexit, populism, migration, the Euro-crisis - and asking what lessons can be learned from and for pluralism. This Research Handbook will be invaluable reading for legal academics specialising in EU law, EU constitutional Law, Legal Theory, and political scientists focused on legal aspects of EU integration. Students on advanced courses in EU law and EU constitutional law, as well as judges at the Court of Justice and higher national courts will also find this stimulating reading. Contributors include: C.M. Amhlaigh, M. Avbelj, M. Cahill, G. Cornelisse, G. Davies, N. de Boer, P. Eleftheriadis, T. Flynn, M. Goldmann, C. Kaupa, R.D. Kelemen, P.F. Kjaer, D. Kochenov, J. Lawrence, P. Leino, L. Leppavirta, J. Lindeboom, P. Lindseth, G. Martinico, F.-X. Millet, J. Priban, S. Sankari, K. Tuori, N. Walker