Mixed Questions and the Scope of Federal Habeas Review: Consideration of Miranda Claims in Thompson v. Keohane

Federal habeas corpus review has a long historical tradition, at common law and in the United States. Over time, federal habeas review has expanded to its modern dimensions, which permit lower federal courts to overturn decisions of the states' highest courts. When federal courts review claims...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Meyers, Rachel (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Libro
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 1997
En:Año: 1997
Acceso en línea: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866346806
003 DE-627
005 20250126054915.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231019s1997 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866346806 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866346806 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Meyers, Rachel  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Mixed Questions and the Scope of Federal Habeas Review: Consideration of Miranda Claims in Thompson v. Keohane 
264 1 |c 1997 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Federal habeas corpus review has a long historical tradition, at common law and in the United States. Over time, federal habeas review has expanded to its modern dimensions, which permit lower federal courts to overturn decisions of the states' highest courts. When federal courts review claims raised by state prisoners, the mandate to protect individual constitutional rights competes with other fundamental constitutional values: the promotion of federalism, in the form of respect for state court judgments, finality and fairness. This Comment analyzes a federal habeas claim of a Miranda violation, a claim which has traditionally been deemed a mixed question of law and fact and therefore subject to de novo review by the lower federal courts. Using the Thompson case as both an example and a point of reference, this Comment discusses the need for reforms to the federal habeas system and the limited impact of the largely procedural reforms implemented in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/230127229.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4392992535 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866346806 
LOK |0 005 20231019043732 
LOK |0 008 231019||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE68243287 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw