Faculty Scholarship & Activities

Published: November 12th, 2007

Category: News

Lyrissa LidskyLyrissa Lidsky
Professor; UF Research Foundation Professor

  • Participated in a panel at the University of Florda, “When Free Speech & Tasers Meet,” which discussed free speech, use of force, and the advantages and disadvantages of Tasers.

 

 

Diane MazurDiane H. Mazur
Professor

  • Spoke on the subject of military law as portrayed in film and television at the Law and Popular Culture Symposium held at Marquette University Law School on November 1, 2007. The symposium celebrated the publication of the new LexisNexis casebook, Law and Popular Culture: Text, Notes, and Questions. Professor Mazur is one of the casebook’s co-authors.

 

Christopher SloboginChristopher Slobogin
Stephen C. O’Connell Chair; Affiliate Professor of Psychiatry; Adjunct Professor, University of South Florida Mental Health Institute; Associate Director, Center for Children and Families

  • Presented his paper, “Dangerousness as an Aggravating Circumstance in Death Penalty Cases,” at Notre Dame Law School on Friday, Nov. 9.

 

UF Law Faculty in the News

SloboginChristopher Slobogin
Stephen C. O’Connell Chair; Affiliate Professor of Psychiatry; Adjunct Professor, University of South Florida Mental Health Institute; Associate Director, Center for Children and Families

  • Florida Today, Nov. 5. Quoted in an article about state Rep. Bob Allen being tried on a single charge of solicitation for prostitution. The article discusses the impact of the publicity on the jury selection and outcome of the case. Slobogin said Allen’s title shouldn’t matter in trying the case. “Ideally, the prosecution shouldn’t treat this case any differently than any other in bringing forward charges and how to prosecute,” he said. When discussing the difficulties in jury selection for this high-profile case, Slobogin said, “It makes it more difficult to pick an unbiased jury. Also, it’s conceivable that there’s a greater likelihood for the public to be biased against the defendant.”
  • Epoch Times (Dublin, Ireland), Nov. 5. Quoted in an article discussing the ABA’s recent call for a moratorium on executions and the way states are handling death penalty cases. Specifically, Slobogin was quoted about the execution of mentally retarded individuals. Between 2 and 5 percent charged with a capital crime suffer from serious mental illness such as schizophrenia or psychosis, or mental retardation, Slobogin said. Even though mentally ill persons are often very suggestive and vulnerable, police tend to treat them no differently in their interrogations than other offenders, which can lead to false confessions. He goes on to say, “Juries often erroneously equate mental retardation with dangerousness, and then perceive the mental condition as an aggravating factor rather than as a mitigating factor.”

Michael Allan WolfMichael Allan Wolf
Richard E. Nelson Chair in Local Government Law; Professor

  • Orlando Sentinel, Nov. 4. Quoted in a column by John Kennedy on the legal questions surrounding Gov. Charlie Crist’s plan to create Save Our Homes portability could hold up in court. Two groups from Palm Beach County and Alabama have already tried to challenge Save Our Homes in court as an affront to the federal constitutional rights to travel and commerce. Last spring, noted tax lawyer Walter Hellerstein concluded portability could add fuel to the legal case against Save Our Homes and convince a federal judge that the “locked in” disparity between new and longtime homeowners was unconstitutional. Other lawyers think the whole system is ripe for a challenge. Kennedy wrote that Wolf says Florida stands to lose one of the arguments courts have recognized in upholding SOH so far—that it promotes stability in communities. Portability promotes mobility, he says.