American Judges Association
Court Review: Journal of the American Judges Association
Accessibility Remediation
If you are unable to use this item in its current form due to accessibility barriers, you may request remediation through our remediation request form.
Date of this Version
2015
Document Type
Article
Citation
Court Review, Volume 51, Issue 4 (2015)
Abstract
Our issue begins with the annual review of the past Term’s criminal cases from the United States Supreme Court. Professor Charles Weisselberg of Berkeley Law presents this engaging review, this time joined by two of his students, Daniel Chen and Sameera Mangena. This is now the eighth straight year that Professor Weisselberg has provided this service to us. His reviews of the cases emphasize aspects most likely to affect judges in state courts, note emerging caselaw responses to the new decisions, and highlight issues that the Court will address in the Term now in progress.
Our second article provides the views of two noted psychologists on issues associated with Miranda warnings. I was surprised at the start to learn of the great variation in the way warnings are given—one study identified more than 1,000 unique variations. Richard Rogers and Eric Drogin then review ways in which a person’s understanding of these warnings could be improved. Judges regularly decide motions to suppress evidence based on a claim that Miranda warnings weren’t appropriately made or understood. This article will help place those discussions in a broader context.
Comments
Copyright American Judges Association. Used by permission.