General instructions:

Required text

Neubauer & Meinhold, Judicial Process: Law, Courts, and Politics in the United States (7th Ed., 2016)

Important Notice!

These course modules contain hyperlinks to all the necessary resources for completion of your assignments. These resources are furnished to you due to your limited exposure to legal research, and to permit you additional time for study rather than wasted hours searching for proper sources.

Professor Availability

The professor will be available via e-mail to students.

Grades

Grade will be based on a percentage of 400 possible points, consisting of three unit tasks (25 points each), three course spanning assignments (25 points each), and a course spanning research paper (150 points). Students are also required to meaningfully participate in online discussions (100 points) as part of this course.

Required Work and Resources

Each student will select either Research Project Option # 1 or Research Project Option # 2. The topic, title, and source materials for each project are provided. Neither the title, nor the subject matter of the project, can be changed by the student. However, the main ideas, all written text, and major subject headings in your paper are up to you.

Unit Writing Assignments

In each unit, you will complete a written assignment designed to advance your skills and understanding toward completion of the final paper. Completed samples of each writing assignment are provided.

Course Spanning Tasks

In addition to unit tasks, the student will complete a course spanning task in each unit. These will be completed and turned in along with unit assignments. Completed samples of each course spanning task are provided.

Student Research Project Option # 1

I. Assigned paper title:

"Hearsay and the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause"

The topic of the paper, and its title, are selected by the instructor. Your paper should cover the entire topic as introduced in the assigned title, using the resource materials provided.

II. Constitutional provision and leading US Supreme Court cases

• U.S. Constitution, Amendment VI (The 6th Amendment)
• Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004)
• Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (2006)
• Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305 (2009)
• Michigan v. Bryant, 131 S.Ct. 1143 (2011)
• Williams v. Illinois, 132 S.Ct. 2221 (2012)

III. The hearsay rule and common exceptions

1. Hearsay means a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
2. Hearsay is not admissible, except as provided by an act of the Legislature.
3. The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule, even though the declarant is available as a witness:
   1. statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or condition, or immediately thereafter; (aka the “present sense impression” exception)
   2. A statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition; (aka the “excited utterance” exception)
   3. A statement of the declarant’s then existing state of mind, emotion, sensation or physical condition, such as intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain and bodily health, but not a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed; (aka the “state of mind” exception)
   4. Statements made for medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or symptoms, pain or sensations, if pertinent to diagnosis or treatment; (aka the “medical diagnosis or treatment” exception)
   5. A record of acts, events, conditions, opinions or diagnosis, made at or near the time by or from information transmitted by a person with knowledge, kept in the course of a regular business activity, if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the record; (aka, the “business records” exception)
4. The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule if the declarant is unavailable as a witness:
   1. Testimony given at another hearing of the same or another proceeding, or in a deposition, if the party against whom the testimony is now offered had an opportunity and similar motive to develop the testimony by direct, cross or redirect examination; (aka the “prior sworn statement” exception)
   2. In a prosecution for homicide or in a civil action or proceeding, a statement made by a declarant while believing that death was imminent, concerning the cause or circumstances of the declarant’s impending death; (aka the “dying declaration” exception).
   3. A statement which was at the time of its making contrary to the declarant’s pecuniary or proprietary interest, or which tended to subject the declarant to civil or criminal liability, and which a reasonable person in the declarant’s position would not have made unless the declarant believed it to be true; (aka the “statement against penal interest” and “statement against pecuniary interest” exceptions).

IV. Scholarly articles

• Mosteller, Crawford v. Washington, Encouraging and Ensuring the Confrontation of Witnesses (October 2, 2012). University of Richmond Law Review, Vol. 39, No. 2, 2005; Duke Law School Legal Studies Paper No. 200.
• Sklansky, Hearsay’s Last Hurrah. Supreme Court Review, Vol. 1, 2009 ; UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 1531334.
• Fenner, Today’s Confrontation Clause (After Crawford and Melendez-Diaz) (November 16, 2009).

Research Project Option # 2

I. Assigned paper title:

"The Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule and its 'good faith' exception"

The topic of the paper, and its title, are selected by the instructor. Your paper should cover the entire topic as introduced in the assigned title, using the resource materials provided here below!

II. Constitutional provision and leading US Supreme Court cases

U.S. Constitution, Amendment IV (The 4th Amendment)

Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961)

U.S. v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984)

Hudson v. Michigan (2006)

Herring v. US, 129 S. Ct. 695 (2009)

Davis v. US, 131 S.Ct. 2419 (2011)

Utah v. Strieff, 136 S. Ct. 2056 (2016)

II. Scholarly articles

Miller, The Good Faith Exception to the Exclusionary Rule: Leon and Sheppard in Context. Criminal Justice Journal, Vol. 7, 1984.

Gray, A Spectacular Non Sequitur: The Supreme Court's Contemporary Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule Jurisprudence (April 4, 2012). American Criminal Law Review, Vol. 50, No. 1.

Cook, Julian A., The Wrong Decision at the Wrong Time: Utah v. Strieff in the Era of Aggressive Policing (November 4, 2016). Southern Methodist University Law Review, Forthcoming.

Kinports, Kit, Culpability, Deterrence, and the Exclusionary Rule (October 27, 2012). William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, Forthcoming.

III. Unit assignments and course spanning tasks

Unit 1

Unit 1 class discussion

After completing your reading and assignments in Unit 1, please post a brief discussion topic about (1) something you learned that you did not know, or that surprised you, about the judicial process; and (2) some question left unanswered by the materials, to which you want to find the answer. Please also return to the discussion and leave a comment on at least two of your classmate's discussions.

Unit 1 writing assignment and course spanning task (combined).

Prepare written case briefs for all cases in your chosen research project. The point of this assignment is to learn the law and case analysis skills you will need to know to write your final paper. Each case brief must include:

• a procedural statement describing how the case reached the court;
• a statement of relevant facts;
• a statement of the issue presented for decision on appeal;
• a statement of the court’s holding (ruling) on the issue;
• a statement of authorities cited and the rationale;
• the final disposition of the case on appeal.

Follow the sample case brief with detailed explanation closely. Brief only the issues involving your research project topic. Ignore other issues (Supreme Court's jurisdiction or other procedural questions).

Turn in 1, and only 1, case brief. The Unit 1 assignment and course spanning task are combined.

Unit 2

Unit 2 class discussion

After completing your reading and assignments in Unit 2, please post a brief discussion topic about (1) something you learned that you did not know, or that surprised you, about the judicial process; and (2) some question left unanswered by the materials, to which you want to find the answer. Please also return to the discussion and leave a comment on at least two of your classmate's discussions.

Unit 2 writing assignment: thesis and outline

Prepare a preliminary thesis statement and subject outline of your final research paper. Consult the sample thesis and subject outline provided.

Unit 2 course spanning task: annotated bibliography

Prepare an annotated bibliography containing entries for the cases and scholarly articles provided. Follow the sample annotated bibliography. Each annotation of a source included in your bibliography should be no less than 50 words and not more than 300 words as a guideline. The point of these assignment is to read and better understand the case law and scholarly articles you will use to complete your final paper.

Turn in your Unit 2 assignments.

Unit 3

Unit 3 class discussion

After completing your reading and assignments in Unit 3, please post a brief discussion topic about (1) something you learned that you did not know, or that surprised you, about the judicial process; and (2) some question left unanswered by the materials, to which you want to find the answer. Please also return to the discussion and leave a comment on at least two of your classmate's discussions.

Unit 3 writing assignment: the case law exposition as part of a larger legal analysis

Prepare one (1) case exposition of approximately 250 to 500 words from a leading Supreme Court case from your chosen project. Consult the sample case expositions. The sample research paper also contains several expositions of individual cases. The point of this assignment is to develop skills in written description and analysis of legal opinions and statutes needed to complete your final paper.

Unit 3 course spanning task: rough draft of an APA formatted research paper

Prepare a rough draft of your final research paper. Your rough draft must contain a cover page, table of contents, thesis statement, a substantial part of your supporting discussion grouped under major subject headings, including exposition and synthesis of the relevant sources, and a References page, all in APA format. A sample paper on a different legal topic is provided for guidance. In your final paper, you must also use proper in-text citations to the statutes, cases, and articles used as sources for your research.

Turn in your Unit 3 assignments.

Unit 4 final paper instructions and rubrics

Prepare and turn in your final research paper, following the rubric for your chosen Research Project #1 or Research Project #2

Congratulations on completing American Judicial Process!