• English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • English 
    • English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Ethics collections
  • Codes of Ethics
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Ethics collections
  • Codes of Ethics
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Browse

All of the LibraryCommunitiesPublication DateTitlesSubjectsAuthorsThis CollectionPublication DateTitlesSubjectsAuthorsProfilesView

My Account

Login

The Library

AboutNew SubmissionSubmission GuideSearch GuideRepository PolicyContact

Statistics

Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

Reconciling Professional Ethics and Prosecutorial Power: The No Contact Rule Debate

  • CSV
  • RefMan
  • EndNote
  • BibTex
  • RefWorks
Author(s)
Burke, Alafair
Keywords
Ex parte communications
Prosecutors

Full record
Show full item record
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/83509
Online Access
http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship/673
http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1745&context=faculty_scholarship
Abstract
The questions whether and when federal prosecutors may ethically contact parties who have retained attorneys about the subject of the representation recently have been the focus of considerable controversy. In this note, Alafair S. R. Burke traces the history of attempts by the Department of Justice to formulate a uniform rule governing such direct communications and analyzes the regulations the Department finalized in August 1994. Ms. Burke argues that federal government attorneys should be subject to a single national standard rather than numerous state no-contact rules, and that certain limited exceptions to the rule are justified in the criminal context. She contends, however, that the new regulations are overbroad because they go beyond the legitimate needs of law enforcement by allowing most direct contacts prior to an arrest. She offers an alternative approach that would create narrow exceptions to the no-contact rule based on the special needs of federal prosecutors. Finally, Ms. Burke argues that prosecutors who violate the rule should be disciplined by state bars but that, contrary to the Second Circuit's holding in United States v. Hammad, courts need not suppress evidence gathered in violation of the rule.
Date
1994-01-01
Type
text
Identifier
oai:scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu:faculty_scholarship-1745
http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship/673
http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1745&context=faculty_scholarship
Collections
Codes of Ethics

entitlement

 
DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
Quick Guide | Contact Us
Open Repository is a service operated by 
Atmire NV
 

Export search results

The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.