No description available.

This thesis will explore the media's increasing impact on the criminal court system, specifically through prejudicial publicity given to criminal trials. In our society, the primary responsibility for gathering and disseminating information rests on the media. The media, consisting primarily of television and written publications, feel that they have a duty to provide citizens with important information about the community and the world. While the media have traditionally gathered news for informational purposes, they also provide news coverage of people and events for entertainment value. This is accomplished by focusing on the out-of-the ordinary and on stories of intrigue that capture the public's fancy. The media's desire to inform and entertain has carried over into the legal process, specifically the criminal court system. The media are typically drawn to cases that either provide a shocking, outrageous storyline, or that have a high-profile, famous defendant. The media love to exploit criminal trials for the suspense, drama, and sensationalism that they produce, as the viewing audience is longing for inside gossip and pure outrageousness. However, the media have the capability of publicizing a case beyond just mere hype, essentially turning the trial into a "media circus." Concerns arise when media outlets release prejudicial information before the case has been tried in front of the trier-of- fact, the jury. If the potential jurors consume this prejudicial, often-times inadmissible, information, then this increases the chances that jurors will pre-form opinions as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant prior to hearing the in-court evidence. If this occurs, the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial by an impartial jury is in serious jeopardy. The media's First Amendment rights of free speech and press, coupled with a presumed right of access to criminal proceedings, lie in direct conflict with the defendant's Sixth Amendment due process rights. Exactly how courts go about balancing these rights delineated by the United States Constitution is still not definitive. The media feel that they can publicize criminal trials in any way they deem appropriate, while defendants argue that the jury pool is tainted by the media's coverage of the case. This prevents a truly unbiased jury from being chosen. Because of these constitutional issues, the United States Supreme Court has seen fit to enter the media publicity debate. While not providing, any definitive rules on when media publicity violates a defendant's Sixth Amendment's rights, the members of the Court have provided some recommendations and direction on these issues. When a case arouses the interest of media outlets nationally and internationally, the primary focus turns to the jury pool. Since jurors are seen as the trial participants most influenced by the media coverage, methods to keep the jury from being exposed to prejudicial pretrial publicity are utilized. At times, a skillfully and thoroughly conducted voir dire can find jurors unexposed to media coverage about the case. The judge's role has expanded in recent years as the media have become more pervasive in the criminal court system. The judge is responsible for supervising the media and for making sure that they do not infringe on the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial by an impartial jury. To accomplish this duty, the trial judge has a number of mechanisms that he or she can employ against the media in order to ensure that a fair and unbiased jury is chosen for the case. However, these mechanisms are loathed by media outlets as they assert that these tools violate their First Amendment rights. Attorneys have been impacted by the media; however this relationship is unique in that it is a reciprocal one. The media publicize the trial of the attorney's client. In turn, the attorney uses this publicity as a weapon to advocate his or her client's case and proclaim guilt or innocence. Concerns about these extrajudicial statements arise when attorneys themselves release prejudicial information through the media to the representative community from which the jury will be chosen. As a result, the American Bar Association and various states have enacted rules designed to limit attorney speech so as to prevent any possibility of prejudice to the defendant in his or her trial. Indeed, the media have become more pervasive in the criminal court system, projecting events to the world as they happen. The coverage also tends to focus on the entertainment value of the case, releasing details that play on the viewer's emotions. However, an aggressive media impacts the due process rights of the accused, thus harming the search for justice. These are all issues and concerns that would not have arisen in this context, but-for the media's continuing impact on the criminal justice system.

Litigation involving the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is not an uncommon phenomenon in today's world. An issue involving the ADA that has received a great deal of attention by the courts in recent years concerns administrative notice/exhaustion. Specifically, a great debate has raged as to whether or not an aggrieved party seeking to file a private suit under Title III of the ADA must first exhaust available state or local administrative remedies or otherwise give notice to state or local administrative agencies having authority to remedy or grant relief from discriminatory practices. Aggrieved parties derive their ability to file private actions against ADA violators through the AD A's incorporation of§ 2000a-3(a) (located in the Civil Rights Act of 1964). While the ADA does not directly require that administrative notice be a prerequisite to filing a private action pursuant to § 2000a-3(a), some courts have argued that administrative notice/exhaustion is required by § 2000a-3( c ), which is located just a few paragraphs below§ 2000a-3(a), when suing in response to ADA violations. Other courts have argued that administrative notice/exhaustion is required on different grounds. Still, there are other courts that affirm that neither administrative notice nor exhaustion is required. This dynamic issue has created a virtual even division among the courts. This thesis examines the cases and arguments against the requirement of administrative notice/exhaustion, the cases and arguments in support of administrative notice/exhaustion, and provides a synopsis of what the law, promulgated by the legislature, intended to require and how this issue could be more appropriately adjudicated by the judiciary in future cases. A great deal of consideration and contemplation is given to the purpose of the ADA and how this purpose can be best effectuated when adjudicating the administrative involvement controversy.

A person's right to publicity may often contradict with another person's rights under the First Amendment. While a person's legal protection over their right of publicity is relatively new in the eyes of our court, this topic of law and other related matters seem to be at the center of attention in current large profile civil litigation cases. The First Amendment seeks to promote speech, whereas the right of publicity laws seeks .to limit speech. If civil action is brought against a defendant for violating the plaintiffs right of publicity, a First Amendment exception may apply as a valid defense. This contradiction in the nature of these laws is forcing our court system to review applicable cases on a case by base basis, resulting in some degree of unpredictability in the courts. Because many of the parties in these cases are large commercial companies, more money is at stake as suits of misappropriation are filed. The issue of what direction(s) the courts should take in this matter spawns opposing views. While some views suggest that bright lines be drawn within right of publicity laws in order to avoid redundant and excessive cases and appeals, opposing views contend that bright lines cannot be drawn given the unique and sometimes artistic expression protected under the First Amendment. Our courts have applied the basic framework of copyright law in order to aid in their decision-making. Courts must weigh the right of publicity against the First Amendment.

No description available.

No description available.

With the demands for efficiency and accuracy being placed on the police by the public, the law enforcement community must adapt to a higher standard. Most sheriff's and police chiefs assume that the more formal education that a police officer attains, the more effective and efficient the officer will become at serving the public in various ways. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of formal education on police officer's beliefs toward the public, their department's administrative policy and the practice of crime fighting in general. This study analyzed a group of deputy sheriffs, under the rank of lieutenant, in the Buchanan, Dickenson, Russell, Tazewell and Washington County Virginia Sheriff's Offices. The sample was divided into three groups - deputies with high school/GED, deputies with some college (1 to 2 years), and deputies with a college degree. Data were collected on a select group of law enforcement officers in Southwest Virginia by means of a survey instrument that was distributed to either the chief deputy or sheriff of each county. This study showed a weak correlation between education levels and police officer's attitudes toward personnel issues, public relations and crime fighting.

This study investigated whether or not the membership of the United States Supreme Court affects the way the institution rules in cases regarding federal administrative agencies by collecting and comparing votes from 2018-2019 and 2020-2022. It found in the first section that justices showed an anti-deferential attitude towards agencies and in the second section a deferential attitude towards agencies, despite the conservative majority being larger in the second section. The result is likely due to the types of agencies and content of cases involved.

The laws of war ha e existed e er since warfare began. The sources of these laws are much more diverse and complex than national laws. They include conventions such as the Hague & the Gene a Con entions to war crime special courts such as the Nuremberg War Trials. The laws of war have brought the international community together to limit the barbaric fighting that was practiced during armed conflicts. Today, however the post 9/11 world is dealing with a different kind of war. The war on terrorism that was lunched after the terrorist attacks of 9/11 certainly requires different rules and procedures and my study attempts to develop a new legislation that would effectively deal with the new challenges of the War on Terror. My thesis examines the different international documents that deal with issues arising during armed conflicts such as the treatment and prosecution of detainees. In addition, my study also considers the approach of the United States government to the war on terror. The Supreme Court case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld 548 U.S. _ (2006) was the most important case as it deemed that many practices of the Bush Administration were unconstitutional and therefore a new approach was needed. I finally end with some recommendations that I strongly believe would strength our war on terrorism while respecting basic principles of justice and fairness.

Juvenile drug use in the country has grown exponentially in recent years. As such, a large percentage of those juveniles currently charged, retained, or on probation for their crimes have committed these crimes while under the influence of drugs. Many of these juveniles come from drug afflicted childhoods, families, and neighborhoods. The rate of recidivism for juveniles is very high and often leads to adult incarceration. The theory of Therapeutic Jurisprudence, utilized through the drug court process, attempts to rehabilitate juveniles into healthy drug-free adults. This study is devoted to exploring the theory of Therapeutic Jurisprudence through juvenile drug courts and the drug court movement. It also investigates whether or not an universal implementation of drug courts into all Florida juvenile systems would have an affect on these juveniles in relation to rates of recidivism and overall health of these juveniles.