Show simple item record

Lessons From Inquisitorialism

dc.contributor.authorSlobogin, Christopher
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-11T20:13:51Z
dc.date.available2018-07-11T20:13:51Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.citation87 Southern California Law Review 699 (2014)en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1803/9254
dc.descriptionarticle published in a law reviewen_US
dc.description.abstractThe adversarial system as it is implemented in the United States is a significant cause of wrongful convictions, wrongful acquittals and “wrongful” sentences. Empirical evidence suggests that a hybrid inquisitorial regime would be better than the American-style adversarial system at reducing these erroneous results. This paper proposes the integration of three inquisitorial mechanisms into the American trial process — judicial control over the adjudication process, non-adversarial treatment of experts, and required unsworn testimony by the defendant — and defends the proposals against constitutional and practical challenges. While other scholars have suggested borrowing from overseas, these three proposals have yet to be presented as a package. Together they could measurably enhance the accuracy of the American criminal justice system.en_US
dc.format.extent1 PDF (36 pages)en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherSouthern California Law Reviewen_US
dc.subjectwrongful convictionen_US
dc.subjectadjudicationen_US
dc.subjecttrial processen_US
dc.subject.lcshLawen_US
dc.subject.lcshCriminal lawen_US
dc.titleLessons From Inquisitorialismen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.ssrn-urihttps://ssrn.com/abstract=2320103


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record