Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Towards an American Model of Criminal Process: The Reform of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure Cover

Towards an American Model of Criminal Process: The Reform of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure

By: Monika Roclawska and  Adam Bulat  
Open Access
|Oct 2014

References

  1. 1. Boratyńska, Katarzyna, Łukasz Chojniak, and Wojciech Jasiński. Postępowanie karne [Criminal procedure]. Warsaw: C.H. Beck, 2012.
  2. 2. Cieślak, Marian. Dzieła wybrane. Tom II. Polska procedura karna. Podstawowe założenia teoretyczne [Selected Works. Volume II. Polish criminal procedure. The basic theoretical assumptions]. Cracow: Jagiellonian University Press, 2011.
  3. 3. Corrado, Michael Louis. “The Future of Adversarial Systems: An Introduction to the Papers from the First Conference.” North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation 35 (2010): 285-296.
  4. 4. Engel, Christoph. “Preponderance of the evidence versus intime conviction: a behavioral perspective on a conflict between American and Continental European law.” Vermont Law Review 33(3) (2009): 435-468.10.2139/ssrn.1401442
  5. 5. Feldmeier, John, and Frank Schmalleger. Criminal Law and Procedure for Legal Professionals. New York: Practice Hall, 2012.
  6. 6. Goodpaster, Gary. “On the theory of American adversary criminal trial.” The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 78 (1987): 118-154.10.2307/1143577
  7. 7. Grzegorczyk, Tomasz, and Janusz Tylman. Polskie postępowanie karne wyd. 8 [Polish criminal proceedings, 8 ed.]. Warsaw: LexisNexis, 2011.
  8. 8. Israel, Jerold, Wayne LaFave, Nancy King, and Orin Kerr. Criminal Procedure. 5th ed. Las Vegas: West Law School, 2009.
  9. 9. Katz, Lewis R., and Neil P. Cohen. Questions & Answers: Criminal Procedure I & II. Newark, NJ: LexisNexis, 2003.
  10. 10. Kuckes Niki. “Civil Due Process, Criminal Due Process.” Yale Law & Policy Review 25 (2006): 1-61.
  11. 11. Lach, Arkadiusz. “Zasada kontradyktoryjności w postępowaniu sądowym w procesie karnym de lege lata i de lege ferenda” [“The principle of adversarial trial in a criminal proces de lege lata and de lege ferenda”]. Palestra 5-6 (2012): 124-138.
  12. 12. Nita, Barbara, and Światłowski Andrzej. “Kontradyktoryjny proces karny (między prawdą materialną a szybkością postępowania)” [“Adversarial criminal litigation (between the material truth and velocity of proceedings”]. Państwo i Prawo 1 (2012): 33-49.
  13. 13. Pawelec, Szymon. “Od wniosku o skazanie bez rozprawy do negocjowania wyroków. Czy zmierzamy w stronę plea bargaining?” [“From a motion to convict the accused without conducting a trial to negotiating a sentence. Are we aiming toward plea bargaining?”]: 218-226. In: Cezary Kulesza, ed. Ocena funkcjonowania porozumień procesowych w praktyce wymiaru sprawiedliwości [The assessment of plea agreements in practice of criminal justice]. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, 2009.
  14. 14. Senna, Joseph, and Larry Siegel. Introduction to Criminal Justice. 8th ed. Las Vegas: Cengage Learning, 1999.
  15. 15. Stefanowicz, Krzysztof. “The victim of the crime in Polish criminal law.” Capital University Law Review 21 (1992): 86-94.
  16. 16. Śliwiński, Stanisław. Polski proces karny przed sądem powszechnym. Zasady ogólne. Wydanie II [Polish criminal process before the court. General principles. Edition II]. Warsaw: Lawyers Publishing House, 1961.
  17. 17. Świda, Zofia, ed. Postępowanie karne. Cześć ogólna [The criminal proceedings. General part.]. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, 2008.
  18. 18. The National Centre for Victims of Crime. “Civil Justice for Victims of Crime.” (2008) // http://victimsofcrime.org/docs/NCVBA/standard-cj-brofinal.pdf?sfvrsn=2 (accessed November 21, 2013).
  19. 19. Tokarczyk, Roman. Prawo amerykańskie [American Law]. Warsaw: Oficyna, 2011.
  20. 20. Walpin, Gerald. “America’s adversarial and jury systems: more likely to do justice.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 26 (2003): 175-186.
  21. 21. Waltoś, Stanisław, and Piotr Hofmański. Proces karny. Zarys systemu [Criminal process. Outline of the systems]. Warsaw: LexisNexis, 2013.
  22. 22. Zacharias, Fred C. “Who owns work product?” University of Illinois Law Review 1 (2006): 127-176.
Language: English
Page range: 1 - 11
Submitted on: Dec 30, 2013
|
Accepted on: May 5, 2014
|
Published on: Oct 8, 2014
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2014 Monika Roclawska, Adam Bulat, published by Faculty of Political Science and Diplomacy and the Faculty of Law of Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania)
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.