Chicago Tribune, June 2, 2010 by David G. Savage
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-na-court-miranda-20100602,0,909528.story
“This is the most important Miranda decision in a decade. And it will have a substantial impact on police practices,” said Charles Weisselberg, a law professor at UC Berkeley. “This decision approves of the practice of giving the warnings and then asking questions of the suspect, without asking first whether he wants to waive his rights.”
Times-Standard, May 5, 2010 by Thadeus Greenson
http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/trial-procedure-suits-claims/14394749-1.html
“A change-of-plea hearing is typically in reference to a proceeding at which someone is going to plead guilty,” said Charles Weisselberg, a professor at University of California Berkeley’s Boalt Hall School of Law.
The Times-Standard, February 26, 2010 by Thadeus Greenson
http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_14475825
Charles Weisselberg, a professor at University of California Berkeley’s Boalt Hall School of Law, said…. “A change-of-plea hearing is typically in reference to a proceeding at which someone is going to plead guilty.”
The Huffington Post, February 25, 2010 by Charles Weisselberg
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-weisselberg/obamas-justice-department_b_476973.html
Why has the Obama Administration jumped in and stuck a fork in Miranda? Perhaps it is simply a misstep by a Solicitor General with no previous law enforcement experience. If, however, this really is the considered position of the Attorney General and the Justice Department, it tells us something more disturbing—that the Obama Administration does not want to afford suspects a fair chance to remain silent in police custody.
The National Law Journal, December 21, 2009 by Marcia Coyle
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/index.jsp (requires registration; go to G:\Law School in the News\News Clips for article)
“This may be a natural consequence, and the new priorities may be right, but this does mean fewer resources for other important law enforcement objectives,” said Weisselberg.
The National Law Journal, December 21, 2009 by Marcia Coyle
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202437011128 (requires registration; go to G:\Law School in the News\News Clips for article)
Constitutional principles that apply to police and government in ordinary criminal cases are now interpreted with an eye toward fighting terrorism, he explained. This is evident in terrorism-related hypotheticals in lawyers’ briefs and oral arguments, as well as in court decisions.
El Paso Times, October 13, 2009 by Ramon Bracamontes
http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_13546071?IADID=Search-www.elpasotimes.com-www.elpasotimes.com
“The judge has to ask himself right now, ‘Can I still be impartial?’ It’s the one question he alone has to answer,” said Weisselberg, who teaches federal criminal law procedure. “It’s a tough question to answer because federal law clearly states that if a reasonable person can question the judge’s impartiality, then a judge has to disqualify himself.”
San Francisco Chronicle, February 20, 2009 by Chip Johnson
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/19/BAB1161CGB.DTL
“I would expect the defense to think very carefully about a motion for a change of venue and it wouldn’t be all that surprising a move,” said Charles Weisselberg, a law professor at the Boalt Hall School of Law at UC Berkeley.
Oakland Tribune, January 15, 2009 by Katy Murphy
http://www.insidebayarea.com/search/ci_11466194?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com
“Are police officers charged with assault and sexual assault and homicide crimes? The answer is yes. Cops are people, too,” said Frank Zimring, a law professor at UC Berkeley. But, he said, murder is so rarely charged as a result of an on-duty use of deadly force because there’s usually “a palpable issue of risk” to the arresting officers or bystanders…. “The officer hasn’t told his side of the story, but when he does, there isn’t going to be an element of that risk,” he said.
Charles Weisselberg, also a UC Berkeley law professor, said it was too soon for him to weigh in on the murder charge, especially without having seen the witness statements and other evidence presented to Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff. “I find it really hard from the videos to determine what’s going on,” he said.
The Mercury News, January 14, 2009 by Tammerlin Drummond
http://www.mercurynews.com/oakland-bart-shooting/ci_11447007
“You charge for the top crime it could be,” says Franklin Zimring, a professor at UC Berkeley’s Boalt Law School, who specializes in criminal law. That top crime, he says, would be second-degree murder — which automatically includes the lesser possibilities of voluntary or involuntary manslaughter.
But if that were to be the case, says Charles Weisselberg, a criminal procedure expert at Boalt Law, “he will want to think carefully about how to state that to members of the public.”
KTUU-TV, Oct. 31, 2008 by Jason Lamb and Rebecca Palsha
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=9276292
A professor of Law at Berkeley Law School, Charles Weisselberg said the term “conviction” can be used in two different contexts. “We’ll often hear the word conviction when the jury returns a verdict of guilty,” said Weisselberg. “That’s the most common and well-understood use of the word. But in federal court, a conviction isn’t made final in the trial court until the person has been sentenced.”
cbs5.com, Oct. 26, 2008 by The Chauncey Bailey Project
http://cbs5.com/local/chauncey.bailey.evidence.2.849310.html
Charles Weisselberg said what is significant is that with Longmire arranging for Bey IV to come to the police station, [Detective] Arotzarena lost control of the case…. Because Bey IV came in with Longmire to surrender, Arotzarena “no longer had control of when (he) was going to arrest or have first contact with … Bey IV.” Arotzarena “was very specific in stating that he had never asked for Bey IV to come down to the police department,” Weisselberg said.
Miller-McCun Magazine, July 11, by Ryan Blitstein
http://www.miller-mccune.com/article/517
Weisselberg believes the judicial ripple effects may reach beyond accused terrorists, with criminal law and procedures from terrorism trials bleeding over to federal cases…. “I don’t think there will be a way to protect U.S. law against these influences, even if we were to remove many cases from the federal courts system,” he said….. Despite his worries, Weisselberg hopes these theories won’t come to fruition. “I’d be happy,” he said, “to be proved wrong.”
San Jose Mercury News, March 6, by Fredric N. Tulsky
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_5168880?IADID&nclick_check=1
Experts also said it is the prosecutor’s duty to reveal evidence regardless of whether the defense already knows it exists or whether they think a judge will admit it. Not only might their assessment be wrong, said Charles D. Weisselberg … but if nothing else the evidence could provide leads for defense attorneys to investigate.
Los Angeles Times, July 20, by Maura Dolan
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-sentence20jul20,1,6991747.story?ctrack=7&cset=true
“For defendants there is no downside to going back and seeking re-sentencing.”
Modesto Bee, July 25, by Emilie Raguso
http://www.modbee.com/local/story/23072.html
“This is a situation where the response of police would be questioned almost any way they decided to go…If a person has weapons and police attempt to force entry, that’s dangerous to officers. They might have to use deadly force to disarm someone with an automatic weapon, and that could lead to the same outcome the officers were trying to avoid.”
McClatchy Newspapers, July 29, by Michael Doyle
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation/story/186022.html
“If the Navy really doesn’t consider itself bound by its own recruiting agreements as to the length of service, it should be forced to change its recruiting practices,” Weisselberg said.