<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
		<rss version="2.0">
		  <channel>
				<title><![CDATA[The Indiana Law Journal &amp; The Indiana Law Journal Supplement - Articles - ]]></title>
				<link>http://www.indianalawjournal.org</link>
				<description />
				<language>en-us</language>
				<copyright><![CDATA[http://www.indianalawjournal.org]]></copyright>
				<generator>N/A</generator>
				<webMaster>admin@indianalawjournal.org</webMaster>
				<lastBuildDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2008 21:17:58 EDT</lastBuildDate>
			
				<ttl>20</ttl>

					<item>
					  <title><![CDATA[The NCSC Sentencing Attitudes Survey: A Report on the Findings]]></title>
					  <link>http://www.indianalawjournal.org/articles/54/1/The-NCSC-Sentencing-Attitudes-Survey-A-Report-on-the-Findings/Page1.html</link>
					  <description><![CDATA[

<p>The climate of public opinion toward crime and punishment
in this country has changed considerably over the past decade. As the national
crime rate has declined, crime is less likely to be in the forefront of
people's minds and&#8212;with the exception of certain high-profile crimes and cases
involving celebrities&#8212;is less prominent in media coverage. What had been a
frequent polling topic ten years ago gets much less attention today. Moreover,
recent surveys about crime often fail to specifically address public attitudes
toward sentencing, or have examined the issue from one particular ideological
point of view.</p>

<span>The NCSC Sentencing Attitudes Survey, a national poll of
1,502 randomly selected adults, was designed to fill this void by delivering
specific, unbiased information about what people think and why. The new survey
thoroughly examines the American public's views toward sentencing and related
issues in an objective manner. The new survey was preceded by a review of past
survey data. This review revealed that, similar to controversial issues like
immigration, abortion, and capital punishment, sentencing is a topic on which
public opinion cannot be properly characterized by simply relying on the
general measures so commonly used. More specific lines of questioning were
developed to dig deeper, clarify previous findings, and identify the competing
values and concerns underlying sentencing attitudes.</span> . . . [for full article click the PDF below] ]]></description>
					  <author>no@spam.com (ILJ Webmaster)</author>
					  <pubDate>Sun, 07 Oct 2007 12:37:57 EDT</pubDate>
					 <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.indianalawjournal.org/articles/54/1/The-NCSC-Sentencing-Attitudes-Survey-A-Report-on-the-Findings/Page1.html</guid>
					</item>

				

					<item>
					  <title><![CDATA[“Administration of Justice Is Archaic”—The Rise of Modern Court Administration: Assessing Roscoe Pound’s Court Administration Prescriptions]]></title>
					  <link>http://www.indianalawjournal.org/articles/52/1/aAdministration-of-Justice-Is-ArchaicaaThe-Rise-of-Modern-Court-Administration-Assessing-Roscoe-Poundas-Court-Administration-Prescriptions/Page1.html</link>
					  <description><![CDATA[<span>This is a heavily edited and partially
reorganized version of the CCJ/COSCA panel on "The Rise of Modern Court
Administration." In it, Sue Dosal and Mary McQueen assess three changes
advocated by Pound in respect to the organization of courts, based on their
experiences as state court administrators in Minnesota and Washington, and
their familiarity with court administration in other states. Russell Wheeler
introduced the session, posed the questions, and was primarily responsible for
editing, annotating, and partially reorganizing the panel transcript, which
Dosal and McQueen edited as well.</span> ]]></description>
					  <author>no@spam.com (ILJ Webmaster)</author>
					  <pubDate>Sun, 07 Oct 2007 12:25:56 EDT</pubDate>
					 <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.indianalawjournal.org/articles/52/1/aAdministration-of-Justice-Is-ArchaicaaThe-Rise-of-Modern-Court-Administration-Assessing-Roscoe-Poundas-Court-Administration-Prescriptions/Page1.html</guid>
					</item>

				

					<item>
					  <title><![CDATA[Roscoe Pound Round-Table Discussion]]></title>
					  <link>http://www.indianalawjournal.org/articles/42/1/Roscoe-Pound-Round-Table-Discussion/Page1.html</link>
					  <description><![CDATA[

<p><span style="font-weight: bold;">Participants</span><b>:</b> Judith Resnik (moderator), Chief Justice Leroy Rountree
Hassell, Sr., Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall, Chief Justice Clifford W.
Taylor, Lucy A. Dalglish, Luke Bierman, and Mark S. Curriden.</p>

 ]]></description>
					  <author>no@spam.com (ILJ Webmaster)</author>
					  <pubDate>Sat, 06 Oct 2007 23:02:41 EDT</pubDate>
					 <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.indianalawjournal.org/articles/42/1/Roscoe-Pound-Round-Table-Discussion/Page1.html</guid>
					</item>

				

					<item>
					  <title><![CDATA[Volume 82 Board of Editors Masthead]]></title>
					  <link>http://www.indianalawjournal.org/articles/30/1/Volume-82-Board-of-Editors-Masthead/Page1.html</link>
					  <description><![CDATA[Indiana Law Journal Board of Editors for Volume 82 (2006-2007)<br/> ]]></description>
					  <author>no@spam.com (ILJ Webmaster)</author>
					  <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2007 20:37:01 EDT</pubDate>
					 <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.indianalawjournal.org/articles/30/1/Volume-82-Board-of-Editors-Masthead/Page1.html</guid>
					</item>

				

					<item>
					  <title><![CDATA[Volume 83 Board of Editors Masthead]]></title>
					  <link>http://www.indianalawjournal.org/articles/56/1/Volume-83-Board-of-Editors-Masthead/Page1.html</link>
					  <description><![CDATA[Volume 83 Board of Editors<br/>]]></description>
					  <author>no@spam.com (ILJ Webmaster)</author>
					  <pubDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2007 18:55:33 EDT</pubDate>
					 <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.indianalawjournal.org/articles/56/1/Volume-83-Board-of-Editors-Masthead/Page1.html</guid>
					</item>

				
				  </channel>
				</rss>
			