Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1654955
 


 



The Ultimate Injustice: When a Court Misstates the Facts


Anthony D'Amato


Northwestern University - School of Law

1990

Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 11, p. 1313, 1990
Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 10-31

Abstract:     
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, K40

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: August 10, 2010  

Suggested Citation

D'Amato, Anthony, The Ultimate Injustice: When a Court Misstates the Facts (1990). Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 11, p. 1313, 1990; Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 10-31. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1654955

Contact Information

Anthony D'Amato (Contact Author)
Northwestern University - School of Law ( email )
375 E. Chicago Ave
Unit 1505
Chicago, IL 60611
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 420
Downloads: 71
Download Rank: 197,723

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.344 seconds