3,669 research outputs found
Professor Steven R. Morrison to Present at Texas Tech Symposium
No full textAssistant Professor Steven R. Morrison will present at the 2014 Criminal Law Symposium entitled Homicide sponsored by the Texas Tech Law Review on April 4th. Professor Morrison will be focusing his presentation on felony murder
Professor Steven R. Morrison files Petition with U.S. Supreme Court
No full textAssistant Professor of Law Steven R. Morrison has filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the United States Supreme Court in the Tarek Mehanna v. United States of America case. Professor Morrison is Counsel of Record for this case
Professor Steven R. Morrison Contributes to Touro Law Center Symposium
No full textAssistant Professor Steven R. Morrison has been invited to participate in the Touro Law Center\u27s 2014 Spring Symposium titled Voting Rights in the Wake of Shelby County v. Holder . This symposium is sponsored by the Touro Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity in which Professor Morrison\u27s essay The Post-Shelby County Game will appear
Professor Steven R. Morrison Appointed to Chair NACDL Subcommittee
No full textAssistant Professor Steven R. Morrison has been appointed by National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) Executive Director Norman L. Reimer to serve as co-chair of the White Collar Subcommittee on Conspiracy Law Reform. This is in response to Morrison\u27s ongoing work with NACDL, his expressed interest in working with NACDL on conspiracy issues, and practical and scholarly work in conspiracy law and membership crime
Professor Steven R. Morrison appointed to NACDL Amicus Curiae Committee
No full textAssistant Professor Steven R. Morrison has been appointed to as the Eighth Circuit\u27s Vice Chair for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyer\u27s Amicus Curiae Committee.
The Amicus Curiae Committee’s mission is to provide amicus assistance on the federal and state level in those cases that present issues of importance to criminal defendants, criminal defense lawyers, and/or the criminal justice system as a whole. Membership in NACDL is not a prerequisite either for amicus assistance from the Committee, or for authorship of an NACDL amicus brief. However, the Committee’s amicus endeavors offer an excellent opportunity to recruit new members among those we assist, and those who author NACDL amicus briefs. In that context, members who bring amicus issues to the Committee’s attention are encouraged to urge attorneys for parties benefitting from such assistance to recognize the work NACDL performs on behalf of the criminal defense community, and to join NACDL to support further activities of the organization
Professor Steven R. Morrison appointed to chair NACDL Task Force
No full textAssistant Professor of Law Steven R. Morrison has been appointed by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers to chair a special task force which will explore the use of police officer-worn body cameras as well as the use of other recording devices, and audio and/or video by citizens. In addition the task force will most likely explore the use of dash cams in police cruisers and civilian vehicles. This task force arose largely because of the events that occurred in Ferguson, MO and was made more salient after the recent shooting in South Carolina. Professor Morrison joins a group of prominent criminal defense attorneys from around the U.S. in his work on this task force
Professor Steven R. Morrison to Publish Articles in Three Law Reviews
No full textAssistant Professor of Law Steven R. Morrison recently had articles accepted for publication in three prominent law reviews. Strictissimi Juris, an article which brings to light the little known rule by the same name will appear in an upcoming issue of the Alabama Law Review. Professor Morrison\u27s article Private Open Forums will be published in the Lewis & Clark Law Review and will discuss the disappearance of traditional public forums, and lastly, covering the right to assemble, Membership Crime vs. the Right to Assemble has been accepted for publication by the John Marshall Law Review
Defending Vicarious Felony Murder
No full textIn Defending Vicarious Felony Murder, Steven R. Morrison examines the doctrine that allows a defendant to be held criminally liable for a killing committed by another during the commission of a felony. The use of vicarious liability in felony murder is shown to undermine the principle that criminal culpability should be based on individual intent, by attributing murder liability to someone who neither killed nor intended a killing. The article analyzes legal developments in Texas and other jurisdictions, focusing on limiting principles like foreseeability, agency, and proximate cause. It also addresses constitutional and policy concerns, including proportionality, fairness, and notice. Morrison concludes by offering refinements to the doctrine to better align legal outcomes with individual blameworthiness
Professor Steven R. Morrison drafts White Paper for NACDL
No full textIn May 2014, NACDL\u27s Board of Directors adopted a white paper drafted by Assistant Professor of Law Steven R. Morrison on law enforcement searches of digital evidence. Entitled What\u27s Old Is New Again: Retaining Fourth Amendment Protections in Warranted Digital Searches (Pre-Search Instructions and Post-Search Reasonableness) , the report makes nine recommendations for reform to the judiciary, legislature, and law enforcement entities to require pre-search restrictions in a warrant for digital evidence, including a waiver of the plain view doctrine, requiring law enforcement to secure a warrant if evidence of an unrelated crime is discovered during the search, and a suppression remedy if the pre-search requirements are not met
Professor Steven Morrison publishes Strictissimi Juris Article
No full textAssistant Professor Steven R. Morrison\u27s article Strictissimi Juris was recently published in the Alabama Law Review. According to the article\u27s abstract, this Article calls on courts and lawyers for the first time to apply strictissimi in a concrete, predictable way. It supports that call by providing strictissimi’s exegesis in descriptive, prescriptive, and contextual ways. Descriptively, it provides the jurisprudential foundation and definition of strictissimi. Prescriptively, it sets forth the purposes for which lawyers and courts have invoked strictissimi, thus providing a guide for how future lawyers might invoke strictissimi, and courts apply it. Contextually, it analogizes strictissimi to substantive canons that play important roles in the separation of powers.
In addition, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers highlights Mr. Morrison\u27s article in its recent publication of The Champion
- …
