by Michael D. Cicchini
This Article identifies and explains several prosecutorial and judicial abuses of the preliminary hearing, including denying defendants their constitutional right to counsel, using multiple levels of uncorroborated hearsay to win bind-over, preventing the defense from effectively cross-examining the state’s witnesses and calling its own witnesses, and even using the preliminary hearing as prosecutorial weapon to tack-on additional felony counts without probable cause.
12 Drexel L. Review 465
by Hayley R. Stillwell
The Constitution has not been amended for nearly three decades. During this time, the line in the sand between political parties has morphed into an impenetrable wall that neither side can or is willing to breach. This begs the question whether the constitutional amendment process in Article V is presently functional.
12 Drexel Law Review 521
by Nicole E. Crossey
This Note argues that the Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules should amend the hearsay rules to provide that, because machine translation poses an increased risk of error and the Confrontation Clause’s purpose is to establish that evidence is reliable, machine translators should not be allowed to speak for non-English-speaking defendants and defendants should be entitled to confront this machine translator testimony.
12 Drexel Law Review 561
by Joseph Goldstein
This Note explains how recent DNA testing laws place innocent and guilty into the same category, proposes an amendment to current expungement law that would ensure complete expungement for all eligible, and considers how we can resuscitate once again the idea that an accused is innocent until proven guilty.
12 Drexel Law Review 597
by Caitlin B. Mininger
This Note examines some of the ways #MeToo can inform sexual harassment law and attempts to apply a critical race feminist lens to these continuing questions.
12 Drexel Law Review 651