•  
  •  
 

Authors

Joel H. Swift

Document Type

Article

Media Type

Text

Abstract

In Gentile v. State Bar of Nevada the United States Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a widely adopted professional regulation covering attorney discussion of pending criminal cases. The Court's conclusion was based in large part on a perceived risk of discriminatory enforcement against defense counsel. This article demonstrates that the Court's concern about discriminatory enforcement is supported by the empirical evidence. Extensive studies of disclosures in criminal cases demonstrate that an attorney trial publicity problem exists, and is substantially one of improper prosecutorial publicity. Nevertheless, the attention of the organized bar and its enforcement of disciplinary rules on trial publicity have focused almost exclusively on criminal defense attorneys, and have manifested an excessively deferential attitude toward prosecutorial publicity.

First Page

399

Last Page

424

Publication Date

5-1-1992

Department

Other

ISSN

0734-1490

Language

eng

Publisher

Northern Illinois University Law Review

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.