Name of the Law Firm & Tagline

Email Me at neilm@ncmlegal.com
for a consultation

Neil C McCabe

McCabe

Published Works by Neil C. McCabe

• COMPARATIVE FEDERALISM IN THE DEVOLUTION ERA, Lanham, MD. (Lexington 2002)
• STATE CONSTITUTIONAL CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Cases and Materials, (with Catherine Greene Burnett), Houston, TX (John Marshall 1994)
• "Our Federalism," Not Theirs: Judicial Comparative Federalism in the U.S., 40 S. TEX. L. REV. 541 (1999)
• Privilege vs. Truth, TEX. LAW. at 21, December 14, 1998
• State Constitutions and Substantive Criminal Law, 71 TEMP. L. REV. 521 (1998)
• Merchants of Chaos, Q., Fall 1997
• A Rescue from the Jaws of the Crocodile: The Post-Certiorari Plain Statement Footnote, 59 ALB. L. REV. 1737 (1996)
• The Crouch Case, TEX. LAW., June 24 (1996)
• State Constitutional Law: Separation of Powers in Criminal Cases, 17 CHAMPION, Nov. 1993
• Attack on the Court Was Misleading, Unfair, TEX. LAW, Aug. 9, 1993
• A Compass in the Swamp: A Guide to Tactics in State Constitutional Law Challenges, (with Catherine Greene Burnett), 25 TEX. TECH L. REV. 75 (1993)

• The State and Federal Religion Clauses: Differences of Degree and Kind, 5 ST. THOMAS L. REV. 49 (1992)
• Legislative Facts as Evidence in State Constitutional Search Analysis, 65 TEMP. L. REV. 1229
• Ex Post Facto Provisions of State Constitutions, (with Cynthia Ann Bell), 4 EMERGING ISSUES ST. CONST. L. 133 (1991)
• Criminal Law Developments Under State Constitutions, 1989-1990, 3 EMERGING ISSUES ST. CONST. L. 1 (1990)
• Sports Fans and Speech Freedom, 27 HOUS. LAW, May-June 1990
• The Right to a Lawyer at a Lineup. Support From State Courts and Experimental Psychology, 22 IND. L. REV. 905 (1989)
• The Right to a Lawyer at a Lineup. Support From State Courts and Experimental Psychology, 3 CRIM. PRAC. L. REV. 1 (1990)
• From Open Fields to Open Skies: The Constitutionality of Aerial Surveillance, 16 SEARCH & SEIZURE L. REP. 153 (1989)
• Four Faces of State Constitutional Separation of Powers: Challenges to Speedy Trial and Speedy Disposition Provisions, 62 TEMP. L. REV. 177 (1989)
• DAs Are Selling the Public a Bill of Goods, TEX. LAW., Feb. 20, 1989

• State Constitutions and the Open Fields Doctrine: A Historical-Definitional Analysis of the Scope of Protection Against Warrantless Searches of Possessions, 13 VT. L. REV. 179 (1988)
• State Maintains its Brand of Justice, TEX. LAW, July 4, 1988
• The State Constitutions in the Bicentennial Year, 17 VOICE FOR THE DEF., Dec. 1987
• Why Johnny Can't Sue: Separation of Powers Between District and County Attorneys in Harris County, 17 VOICE FOR THE DEF., Sept. 1987
• Holmes v. Eckles Decision: A Victory for Civil Litigants, TEX. LAW., May 4, 1987
• Sodomy Decision Ironic, TEX. LAW., Aug. 4, 1986
• The New Doctrine of Fundamental Error: Texas Gets in Step with the Majority on Criminal Cases, (with David L. Crump), 23 HOUS. LAW., Jan. Feb. 1986
• Twenty-Fifth Annual Philip C. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition, (Co-Author with Richard J. Graving, Chris DiFerrante, David W. Holman, M. Kip Morgan, Katrina D. Packard; David J. Sacks), 26 S. TEX. L.J. 243 (1985)
• In Defense of Almanza, TEX. LAW., Sept. 25, 1985
• Defending McMaster, TEX. LAW., Aug. 7, 1985

CITATIONS TO NEIL MCCABE'S PUBLICATIONS IN JUDICIAL OPINIONS

  • City of Dallas v. Stewart, 361 S.W.3d 562, 573 (Tex. 2012).
  • In re Dependency of S.K.-P., 401 P.3d 442, 200 Wn.App. 86, 108 (Wash. App. 2017).
  • State v. Baldon, 829 N.W.2d 785, 833 (Iowa 2013).
  • People v. Galvadon, 103 P.3d 923, 936 (Colo. 2005).
  • Martinez v. State, 503 S.W.3d 728, 734(Tex. App. –El Paso, Nov. 16, 2016, pet. ref’d).
  • State v. Baldon, 829 N.W.2d 785, 833 (Iowa 2013).
  • Medrano v. State, 421 S.W.3d 869, 878 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2014, pet. ref’d).
  • Armadillo Bail Bonds v. State, 802 S.W.2d 237, 239 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990).
  • Autran v. State, 887 S.W.2d 31, 37 n. 6 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994).
  • Johnson v. State, 912 S.W.2d 227, 237 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (Baird, J., concurring).
  • Bauder v. State, 921 S.W.2d 696, 700 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (Clinton, J., concurring).
  • Tilton v. Marshall, 925 S.W.2d 672, 677 n. 6 (Tex. 1996).
  • Ex parte Tucci, 859 S.W.2d 1, 12 n. 34 (Tex. 1993).
  • State v. Kirchoff, 587 A.2d 988, 991 (Vt. 1991) and 997 (Springer, District Judge, Ret., Specially Assigned, concurring).
  • Malyon v. Pierce County, 935 P.2d 1272, 1281 n. 30 (Wash. 1997).
  • Saldana v. State, 846 P.2d 604, 661 (Wyo. 1993).
  • State v. McMorris, 570 N.W.2d 384, 390 n. 9 (Wis. 1997).
  • State v. Senn, 882 N.W.2d 1, 58 (Iowa 2016) (Appel, J., dissenting).
  • Artway v. Attorney General of New Jersey, 876 F.Supp. 666, 671 (D.N.J. 1995).
  • Muniz v. State, 865 S.W.2d 513, 517 n. 5 (Tex. App. —San Antonio 1993, pet. ref’d)
  • Thurman v. State, 861 S.W.2d 96, 99 (Tex. App. —Houston [1 Dist.] 1993, no pet.)

CITATIONS TO NEIL MCCABE'S BOOKS, ARTICLES, AND COMMENTS IN SCHOLARLY LITERATURE

  • Judith Wyttenbach, Systemic and Structural Factors Relating to Quality and Equality of Human Rights Implementation in Federal States: A Critical Assessment of the Practice of Human Rights Treaty Bodies, 7 Int’l Hum. Rts. L. Rev. 43, 59 n. 82(2018).
  • Laurent Sacharoff, Montejo and the New Judicial Federalism, 50 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 599, 614 n. 169 (2017-2018).
  • K.W. Graham, Faculty Law Review Articles, 1894-2017 153 UCLA Public Law & Legal Theory Series (2018).
  • Jessica Steinberg, Anna E. Carpenter, Colleen F. Shanahan, & Alyx Mark, Studying the “New” Civil Judges, Wis. L. J. 249, 268 n. 82 (2018).
  • Roberto Niembro O, LA DISTRIBUCIÓN DE COMPETENCIAS LEGISLATIVAS TRATÁNDOSE DE DERECHOS FUNDAMENTALES PREVISTOS EN LA CONSTITUCIÓN MEXICANA 1 n. 2, 23 n.47 (2017).
  • Сборникнаучныхстатей, ТИПЫ ПРАВОПОНИМАНИЯ И ВЫЗОВЫ МЕНЯЮЩЕГОСЯ МИРА104 n. 222 (Санкт-Петербург2016).
  • Carlos Fernandez Ferriero, La Descentralizacion en Europa Central y Oriental: Balance y Perspectivas para una Agenda Futura 164 (2011).
  • IL FEDERALISMO E LE COSTITUZIONI FEDERALI. PARTE PRIMA: LINEE EVOLUTIVE NEL PENSIERO POLITICO E NELLA TEORIA GIURIDICA. Percorso bibliografico nelle collezioni della Biblioteca del Senato 2002 (2000-2011).
  • M. Boggiani, Certezza e Diritto Penale Statunitense: Vagueness, Iretroattivita e Stare Decisis 94, nn. 3 & 4 (2015)
  • Daniel Pommier Vincelli, Il Federalismoin Romania: Il Dibattito Sulla Transilvanian. 7 (2005).
  • Guénola Capron, Carmen Icazuriaga Montes, Silvana Levi,et al, LA GEOGRAFÍA CONTEMPORÁNEA Y ELISÉE RECLUS (2011).
  • Grigol Ubiria, Soviet Nation-Building in Central Asia: The Making of the Kazakh andUzbek Nations98 n. 27 (2015).
  • Liberalization Trends of Criminal Law in Georgia 144, n. 31 (Tblisi 2016).
  • Aanwinstenlist, Van Vollenhoven Institute for Law, Governance and Development (Feb. 2006).
  • When Legal Systems Meet: Bijuralism in the Canadian Federal System, C. Lloyd Brown-John & Howard Pawley, Institut de Ciencies Politiques I Socials Adscrit a la Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona (2004)
  • Vincent de Briant, Contribution a l’etude des “arrangements federatifs” de l’Etat federal a l’Etat unitaire decentralizen. 17(2009).
  • Signe Howell, Formal Speech Acts as One Discourse, Man, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Mar., 1986) (Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland)
  • Christoph Kern, Justice Between Simplification and Formalism: A Discussion and Critique of the World Bank, Lex Mundi Project on Efficiency of Civil Procedure 38 n. 27 (Tubingen, Germany 2007).
  • Cyril Robert Emery, Treaty Solutions from the Land Down Under:Reconciling American Federalism and InternationalLaw, 24 Penn State International Law Review115, 126 n. 47(2005).
  • Gerald Baier, New Judicial Thinking on Sovereignty and Federalism: American and Canadian Comparisons, 23 The Justice System Journal 1, 2 n.1, 20 (2002).
  • Encyclopedia of American Civil Rights and Liberties: Revised and Expanded 352 (Kara E. Stooksbury, John M. Scheb II, Otis H. Stephens Jr., ed.) (2017).
  • Constitutional Law, 122 Harv. L. Rev. 276, 312 n. 71(November 2008).
  • Supreme Court –LeadingCases, 114 Harv. L. Rev. 195, 195n. 66 (2000).
  • Supreme Court –Leading Cases, 122 Harv. L. Rev. 312 at n.71 (2007).
  • Robert F. Williams, The Law of American State Constitutions 144 n. 46, 173 n. 197, 175 n. 206 (Oxford Univ. Press 2009).
  • Maureen E. Brady, The Lost Effects of the Fourth Amendment: Giving Personal Property Due Protection, 125 Yale L. J. 946, 972 n. 115(2015-2016).
  • Warren Redlich, A Substantive Due Process Challenge to the War on Drugs47 n. 41 (2017).
  • Myron Moskovitz, Cases and Problems in Criminal Procedure: The Police(2014).
  • Robert F. Williams, State Constitutional Law: Cases and Materials (2006).
  • Boris I. Bittker, Scott C. Idleman, Frank S. Ravitch, Religion and the State in American Law 152 n. 15 (2015).
  • Andrea Iff, Peace-Promoting Federalism: Making Sense of India and Nigeria, 42 Publius: The Journal of Federalism 227 (2013).
  • Joshua Dressler & Alan C. Michaels, Understanding Criminal Procedure: Investigation3, n. 6 (2013).
  • Joshua Dressler & Alan C. Michaels, Understanding Criminal Procedure: Adjudication (2006).
  • Naikang Tsao, Ameliorating Environmental Racism: A Citizens' Guide to Combatting the Discriminatory Siting of Toxic Waste Dumps, 67 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 366, 397 n. 189(May 1992).
  • Daniel B. Yeager, Search, Seizure and the Positive Law: Expectations of Privacy Outside the Fourth Amendment, 84 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 249, 293 n. 267(Summer 1993).
  • Robert R. Barton, Texas Search and Seizure 7 n. 14 (2015).
  • Scott N. Cameron, Chapter 906: California’s DNA Data Bank Joins the Modern Trend of Expansion, 33 McGeorge L. Rev. 219, 229 n. 103 (2001-2002).
  • Paul R. Stone & Henry De La Garza, Criminal Trespass and the Exclusionary Rule in Texas, 24 St. Mary's L.J. 443, 448 n. 20, 451 n. 33, 453 n. 43(1992-1993).
  • Jean-Paul Layrisson, The Exclusion of Unconstitutionally Obtained Evidence and Why the Louisiana Supreme Court Should Reject United States v. Leon on Independent State Grounds, 51 La. L. Rev. 861, 870 n. 54 (1990-1991).
  • Cheryl Rubenstein, Legislating Religious Liberty Locally: The Possibility of Compelling Conflicts,19 Rev. Litig. 289, 301 n. 60, 302 nn. 66 & 67, 307 n. 96 (2000).
  • Daniel Gordon, Reestabishment of Religious Freedom: Developing an Alternative Model Based on State Constitutional Privacy,66 Miss. L.J. 127, 130 n. 16(1996-1997).
  • So Chun, A Decade after Smith: An Examination of the New York Court of Appeals' Stance on the Free Exercise of Religion in Relation to Minnesota, Washington, and California, 63 Alb.L. Rev. 1305, 1308 n. 21, 1313 n. 69(1999-2000).
  • Scott C. Idleman, Religious Freedom and the Interscholastic Athlete,12 Marq. Sports L. Rev. 295, 326 n. 148(2001-2002).
  • William G. Arnot & Karl W. Seelbach, Erroneously Compelled to Arbitration –Interlocutory and Mandamus Review Post-Palacios, 20 Appellate Advocate 5 (2007).
  • Criminal Law –Search and Seizure –Use of a Pen Register May Be a Search within the Purview of Article I, Section 9 of the Texas Constitution, 26 St. Mary’s L.J. 643, 658 n. 79 (1994-1995).
  • Scott A. Johnson, The Conflict between Religious Exercise and Efforts to Eradicate Housing Discrimination against Nontraditional Couples: Should Free Exercise Protect Landlord Bias, 53 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 351, 356 n. 25, 357 n. 28, 383 n. 184(1996).
  • Walter Walsh, The Fearful Symmetry of Gay Rights, Religious Freedom, and Racial Equality, 40 Howard L.J. 513, 536 n. 103(1996-1997).
  • George E. Dix, Independence in Texas Constitutional Self-Incrimination and Search Law, 31 S. Tex. L. Rev. 577, 616 n. 221(1990).
  • Michael V. Hernandez, The Right of Religious Landlords to Exclude Unmarried Cohabitants: Debunking the Myth of the Tenant's New Clothes, 77 Neb. L. Rev. 494n. 259(1998).
  • Scott C. Idleman, Tort Liability, Religious Entities, and the Decline of Constitutional Protection, 75 Ind. L.J. 219, 246 n. 77 (2000).
  • George D. Marlow, From Black Robes to White Lab Coats: The Ethical Implications of a Judge’s Sua Sponte, Ex Parte Acquisition of Social and Other Scientific Evidence during the Decision-Making Process, 72 St. John’s L. Rev. 291, 304 n. 59 (1998).
  • Aaron M. Clemens, Removing the Market for Lying Snitches: Reforms to Prevent Unjust Convictions,23 QLR 151, 192-93 nn. 182 & 183(2004-2005).
  • Jack M. Battaglia, Religion, Sexual Orientation,and Self-Realization: First Amendment Principles and Anti-Discrimination Laws, 76 U. Det. Mercy L. Rev. 189, 303 n. 687(1998-1999).
  • Robert F. Williams, State Constitutional Law: Teaching and Scholarship, 41 J. Legal Educ. 243, 247 n. 23 (1991).
  • Alan Copelin, A Time to Act: Statutory Exceptions to State-Created Exclusionary Rules, 20 Am. J. Crim. L. 339, 354 n. 95(1992-1993).
  • Markus Dirk Dubber, Toward a Constitutional Law of Crime and Punishment, 55 Hastings L.J. 509, 529 n. 80(2003-2004).
  • Alex Kreit, Vicarious Criminal Liability and the Constitutional Dimensions of Pinkerton, 57 Am. U. L. Rev. 585, 606 n. 106(2007-2008).
  • Mark Noferi, Towards Attenuation: A New Due Process Limit on Pinkerton Conspiracy Liability, 33 Am. J. Crim. L. 91, 119 n. 159(Spring 2006).
  • Andrew J. Liese, We Can Do Better: Anti-Homeless Ordinances as Violations of State Substantive Due Process Law, 59 Vand. L. Rev. 1413, 1437 n. 146(2006).
  • Deanell Reece Tacha, The Federal Courts in the 21st Century, 2 Chap. L. Rev. 7, 13 n.16(1999).
  • Susan F. Mandiberg, Why Sentencing by a Judge Satisfies the Right to Jury Trial: A Comparative Law Look at Blakely and Booker,40 McGeorge L. Rev. 107, 137 n. 202(2009).
  • C. Lane Mears, Constitutional Law -Fourth Amendment -Another Slice of the Right to Privacy Pie: Do Public Schoolchildren Maintain Any Fourth Amendment Rights after Vernonia Sch. Dist. 47J v. Acton, 115 S. Ct. 2386 (1995), 37 S. Tex. L. Rev. 591, 604 n. 93(1996)
  • Jennifer L. Couture, Constitutional Law -An Ex Post Facto Analysis of Sex Offender Registration Statutes: Branding Criminals with a Scarlet Letter, 29 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 1199, 1201 n. 18(1995).
  • Suzanne M. Monte, The Lack of Privacy in Vermont, 24 Vt. L. Rev. 199, 201 nn. 18 & 19, 202 n. 22(1999-2000).
  • William T. Stetzer, The Worst of Both Worlds: How the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Have Abandoned Juveniles in the Name of Justice, 35 Washburn L.J. 308, 317 n. 60(1995-1996).
  • Marshall J. Tinkle, Forward into the Past: State Constitutions and Retroactive Laws, 65 Temple L. Rev. 1253, 1253 n. 2(1992).
  • Dori Lynn Yob, Mistaken Identifications Cause Wrongful Convictions: New Jersey's Lineup Guidelines Restore Hope, but are They Enough, 43 Santa Clara L. Rev. 213, 227-28 n. 150(2002-2003).
  • Michael D. Schagemann, The Implicitly Constitutional Item Veto, 19 Okla. City U. L. Rev. 161, 180 n. 154(1994).
  • Julia A. Houston, Sex Offender Registration Acts: An Added Dimension to the War on Crime, 28 Ga. L. Rev. 729, 757 n. 174(1993-1994).
  • Matthew S. Crider, Criminal Procedure-Searches and Seizures -Police Officers Must Meet Reasonable Officer Standard to Withstand Pretext Claim -State v. Haskell, 645 A.2d 619 (Me. 1994), 36 S. Tex. L. Rev. 629, 633 n. 22(1995).
  • Tracey Levy, Rediscovering Rights: State Courts Reconsider the Free Exercise Clauses of Their Own Constitutions in the Wake of Employment Division v. Smith, 67 Temple L. Rev. 1017, 1032 n. 119(1994)
  • John R. Tunheim, Criminal Justice: Expanded Protections under the Minnesota Constitution, 20 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev. 465, 503 n. 299(1994).
  • David Kushner, Free Exercise, Fair Housing and Marital Status--Alaskan Style, 12 Alaska L. Rev. 335, 369 n. 149(1995).
  • Daniel A. Crane, Beyond RFRA: Free Exercise of Religion Comes of Age in the State Courts, 10 St. Thomas L. Rev. 235, 238 n. 33, 244 n. 64(1997-1998).
  • Jonathan Feldman, Separation of Powers and Judicial Review of Positive Rights Claims: The Role of State Courts in anEra of Positive Government, 24 Rutgers L.J. 1057, 1066 n. 49(1992-1993).
  • Wayne Logan, The Ex Post Facto Clause and the Jurisprudence of Punishment, 35 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 1261, 1318 n. 356(1997-1998).
  • Robert F. Williams, In the Glare of the Supreme Court: Continuing Methodology and Legitimacy Problems in Independent State Constitutional Rights Adjudication,72 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1015, 1019 n. 22 (1997).
  • Randall D. Johnson, The Criminally Derived Property Statute: Constitutional and Interpretive Issues Raised by 18 U.S.C. 1957, 34 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 1291, 1343 n. 186(1992-1993).
  • John Devlin, Toward a State Constitutional Analysis of Allocation of Powers: Legislators and Legislative Appointees Performing Administrative Functions, 66 Temple L. Rev. 1205, 1211 n.21(1993).
  • Richard E. Mitchell, An Ex Post Facto Enigma: When Does Increased Incarceration Not Equate to Increased Punishment, 49 Fla. L. Rev. 179, 181 n. 16(1997).
  • Michael E. Keasler, The Texas Experience: A Case for the Lockstep Approach, 77 Miss. L.J. 345, 345 n. 2(2007-2008).
  • Robert F. Williams, Looking Back at the New Judicial Federalism's First Generation, 30 Val. U. L. Rev. i n. 25(1995-1996).
  • Paul E. McGreal, Alaska Equal Protection: Constitutional Law or Common Law, 15 Alaska L. Rev. 209, 213 nn. 11 & 12(1998).
  • Donna M. Nakagiri, Developing State Constitutional Jurisprudence after Michigan v. Long: Suggestions for Opinion Writing and Systemic Change, 1998 Det. C.L. Rev. 807, 850 n. 269(1998).
  • Jessica l. Schneider, Breaking Stride: The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals' Rejection of the Lockstep Approach 1988-1998, 62 Alb. L. Rev. 1593, 1594 n. 4(1998-1999).
  • Matthew S. Raalf, A Sheep in Wolf's Clothing: Why the Debate Surrounding Comparative Constitutional Law Is Spectacularly Ordinary, 73 Fordham L. Rev. 1239, 1252 n. 79, 1255 n. 100, 1255 n. 111, 1279 n. 242, 1282 n. 262 (2004-2005).
  • Melanie Popper, Retrospective Application of State Firearm Prohibitions Triggering Enhanced Sentencing under Federal Law: A Violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause--The Circuits Split, 27 New Eng. J. on Crim. & Civ. Confinement 307, 323 n. 164 (2001).
  • Wolfang P. Hirczy de Mino, Does an Equal Rights Amendment Make a Difference, 60 Alb. L. Rev. 1581, 1583 n. 10 (1996-1997).
  • Donald T. Hornstein, Resiliency, Adaptation, and the Upsides of Ex Post Lawmaking, 89 N.C. L. Rev. 1549, 1550, n. 2(2010-2011).
  • Felicia Harris Kyle, Constitutional Law -Peremptory Challenges -Religious-Based Peremptory Challenges in Light of J.E.B. and the Texas Constitution -Casarez v. State, 913 S.W.2d 468 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994), 38 S. Tex. L. Rev. 281, 301 n. 118(1997).
  • Kimberly S. Keller, Privacy Lost: Comparing the Attenuation of Texas's Article 1, Section 9 and the Fourth Amendment, 34 St. Mary's L.J. 429, 437 n. 32(2002-2003).
  • David A. Sonenshein & Robin Nilon, Eyewitness Errors and Wrongful Convictions: Let's Give Sciencea Chance, 89 Or. L. Rev. 263, 269 n. 25(2010-2011).
  • John B. Wefing, State Supreme Court Justices: Who Are They, 32 New Eng. L. Rev. 47, 50 n. 5(1997-1998).
  • Michael V. Young, Double Jeopardy and Defendant's Request for Mistrial: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Finds Prosecutor's Intent No Longer Critical: Prosecutor Should Have Known; Bauder v. State, 921 S.W.2d 696 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996), 27 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 1631, 1657 n. 261(1996).
  • Danielle Kitson, It's an Ex Post Fact: Supreme Court Misapplies the ExPost Facto Clause to Criminal Procedure Statutes, 91 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 429, 467 n. 317(2000-2001).
  • James O. Hacking III, Won't You Be My Neighbor: Do Community Notification Statutes Violate Sexual Offenders' Rights under the Constitution's Ban onthe Passage of Ex Post Facto Laws, 41 St. Louis U. L.J. 761, 776 n. 105(1996-1997).
  • Dannye Holly, The Supreme Courts: Did September 11th Accelerate Their Sanctioning the Constitutionality of Criminalizing Suspicion, 7 Pierce L. Rev. 39 (2008-2009).
  • Dannye Holley, The Supreme Courts: Did September 11th Accelerate Their Sanctioning the Constitutionality of Criminalizing Suspicion?7 U.N.H. L. Rev. 39,71 n. 157 (2008).
  • John S. Baker Jr., State Police Powers and the Federalization of Local Crime, 72 TempleL. Rev. 673, 706 n. 178(1999).
  • Henry F. Fradella, A Content Analysis of Federal Judicial Views of the Social Science Researcher's Black Arts, 35 Rutgers L.J. 103, 105 n. 14(2003-2004).
  • Kevin Barry, Going Retro: Abolition for All, 46 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 669, 738 n. 416(2014-2015).
  • Evan R. Seamone, Judicial Mindfulness, 70 U. Cin. L. Rev. 1023, 1084 n. 287(2001-2002).
  • James K. Leven, Attention Gun-Rights Advocates: Don't Forget the Illinois Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 53, 88 n. 169(2014-2015).
  • Dan Friedman, Tracing the Lineage: Textual and Conceptual Similarities in the Revolutionary-Era State Declarations of Rights of Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware, 33 Rutgers L.J. 929, 959 n. 119(2001-2002).
  • Annual Survey of Pennsylvania Administrative Law: Survey of Selected Court Decisions, 8 Widener J. Pub. L. 601, 887 n. 34(1998-1999).
  • Robert F. Williams, State Constitutional Methodology in Search and Seizure Cases, 77 Miss. L.J. 225, 234 n. 42(2007-2008).
  • James W. Paulsen, Family Law: Parent and Child, 47 S.M.U. L. Rev. 1197, 1200 n. 27(1993-1994)
  • Colin Shaff, Is the Court Allergic to Katz -Problems Posed By New Methods of Electronic Surveillance to the Reasonable-Expectation-of-Privacy Test, 23 S. Cal. Interdisc. L.J. 409, 439 n. 174(2014).
  • Wayne A. Logan, Democratic Despotism and Constitutional Constraint: An Empirical Analysis of Ex Post Facto Claims in State Courts, 12 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 439, 466 n. 203, 467 n. 212(2003-2004).
  • Rokosky, Denied and Disparaged: Applying the “Federalist” Ninth Amendment, 159 U. Pa. L. Rev, 275,278-79 n. 16 (2010)
  • J. Mitchell Pickerill &Paul Chen, Medical Marijuana Policyand the Virtues of Federalism,38 Publius 22, 53 (2008).
  • James N. G. Cauthen, State Constitutions and Challenges to Nonpublic School TransportationPrograms, 49 J. Church & State498 (2007)
  • Jeremy Patrick, The Religion Provisions of the Nebraska Constitution: An Analysis and Litigation History, 19 Journal of Law and Religion, 331,333 n. 7, 333-34 n. 10, 371-72 n. 257 (2003-2004).
  • Wolfgang Mieder, Review of Lexikon der sprichwörtlichen Redensarten by Lutz Röhrich, 88 J. Amer. Folklore, 420, 421 n. 5 (1975).
  • A Dictionary of American Proverbs 700 (Oxford Univ. Press 1996) (Wolfgang Mieder, Stewart A. Kingsbury, & Kelsie B. Harder eds.).
  • Anand Prahlad, African-American Proverbs in Context 269(University Press 1996).
  • Elliot Oring, Folk Groups and Folklore Genres:An Introduction 195 (Utah State University Press. 1986)
  • James J. Tomkovicz, The Right to the Assistance of Counsel:A Reference Guide to the United States Constitution. (Greenwood Press 2002).
  • Douglas Husak, Overcriminalization: The Limits of the Criminal Law122 n. 1 (Oxford University Press 2008).
  • American Proverb Literature: A Bibliography, F.A. De Caro & W.A. McNeil, Folklore Forum, Dec. 1970, page 25.
  • Stapleton, P. and Skinner, D. ‘The Affordable Care Act and Assisted Reproductive Technology Use’, Politics and the Life Sciences 34(2)n. 15(Cambridge University 2015).
  • Ann O’M. Bowman & Richard C. Kearney,Subsidiarity in State-Local Relations 16 (2010).
  • Donald T. Hornstein, Resiliency, Adaptation, and the Upsides of Ex Post Lawmaking, 89 N.C. L. Rev. 1549, 1550 n. 2(2011).
  • J. Kelly Strader, Lawrence’s Criminal Law, 16 Berkeley J. Crim. L. 41, 62 n. 115 (2011).
  • Lawrence Friedman, The Constitutional Value of Dialogue and the New Judicial Federalism, 28 Hastings Const L. Q. 93, 107 n. 58 (2000).
  • Jeffrey Omar Usman,Constitutional Constraints on Retroactive Civil Legislation: The Hollow Promises of the Federal Constitution and Unrealized Potential of State Constitutions, 14 Nev. L.J. 63, 68 n. 35(2013).
  • B. Latzer, State Constitutional Criminal Law (2000)J. Thomas Sullivan,Developing a State Constitutional Law Strategy in New Mexico Criminal Prosecutions, 39 N.M. L. Rev. 407, 413 n. 28(2009).
  • Michael J. Desmond, Limiting a Defendant's Peremptory Challenges: Georgia v. McCollum and the Problematic Extension of EqualProtection, 42 Cath. U. L. Rev. 389, 397 n. 42 (1993).
  • Nina Morrison, Curing “Constitutional Amnesia”: Criminal Procedure under State Constitutions, 880 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 883, n. 24 (1988).
  • Vicki Zick, Reshaping the Constitution to Meet the Practical Needs of the Day: The Judicial Preference for Binding Arbitration, 82 Marq. L.Rev. 247, 249 n. 14(1998).
  • Mark Tushnet, The Rhetoric of Free Exercise Discourse, 1993 BYU L. Rev. 117, 119 n. 10(1993).
  • Ted Occhialino, How One Law Review Article Transformed the Law of New Mexico Forever (Not!), 40 N.M. L. Rev. 207, 209 n. 25(2010).
  • James J. Tomkovicz, The Right to the Assistance of Counsel: A Reference Guide to the United States Constitution (Greenwood Press 2002).
  • Douglas Husak, Overcriminalization: The Limitsof the Criminal Law (Oxford University Press 2008).
  • Thomas Y. Davies, Recovering the Original Fourth Amendment, 98 Mich. L. Rev. 547, 708 n. 460 (1999).
  • K.J. Lau, Vox Populi: Parody and Political Proverbs, in The Proverbial “Pied Piper”: A Festschrift Volume of Essays in Honor of Wolfgang Mieder 77-78 (Peter Lang & Kevin J. McKenna ed.) (2009).
  • Wolfgang Mieder & Anne Tothke Litovkina, Twisted Wisdom: Modern Anti-Proverbs(1999).
  • Sandra K. Dolby, Self-Help Books: Why Americans Keep Reading Them 164 (Univ. Ill. Press 2005)W. Mieder, Deutsche Sprichwörter in Literatur, Politik, Presse und Werbung(1983).
  • D. Boesky, Proverbs and Psychoanalysis (1976).
  • Wise Words: Essays on the Proverb 545 (Routledge 1994 Wolfgang Mieder ed.).
  • Gabrijela Buljan & Tanja Gradečak-Erdeljić,Where Cognitive Linguistics Meets Paremiology: A Cognitive Contrastive View of Selected English and Croatian Proverbs64,81 (Exell 2013).
  • C. Lindahl, J.S. Rikoon, E.J. Lawless, A Basic Guide to Fieldwork for Beginning Folklore Students: Techniques of Selection, Collection, Analysis , and Presentation (1979).
  • Trevor Blank, Fieldwork, Memory, and the Impact of 9/11 on an Eastern Tennessee Klansman: A Folklorist’s Reflection, 35 Voices, J. N.Y. Folklore (Fall-Winter 2009).
  • Joshua Canzona, Contradictory Impulses in the Psychedelic Sixties, 20.1 Limina 11 n. 47 (2014).
  • Laura Douglass, How Did We Get Here? A History of Yoga in America, 1800-1970, 17 Int’l J. Yoga Therapy 35, 40 n. 61 (2007).
  • Note, The Erosion of Nebraska’s Free Exercise Protection: In re Interest of Anaya (Anaya II) 89 Neb. L. Rev. 159, 167 n. 63 (2008).