The Ultimate Injustice: When a Court Misstates the Facts
Northwestern University - School of Law
Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 11, p. 1313, 1990
Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 10-31
This essay deals with what “the law” did to Dr. Branion, an American citizen, after the jury convicted him of murder in 1968. Under the American legal system, a defendant is entitled to have his case reviewed by a higher court, and, under certain circumstances, if the appellate review is unsuccessful, to present a petition for habeas corpus to a state or federal court. I will focus primarily on the stage of his litigation with which I am most familiar: his pursuit of a habeas remedy in federal court between 1986 and 1989. I will try to explain how one federal judge after another, using reasons wholly inconsistent inter se, managed to affirm the conviction of a provably innocent man.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 32
Keywords: Miscarriage of Justice, Habeas Remedy, Appellate Review, Deconstruction and Justice, Legal Indeterminacy, Judicial Misrepresentation, Legal Deconstruction
JEL Classification: K10, K30, K40Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: August 10, 2010
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.344 seconds