Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Lafler v. Cooper"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>L235 (create DYK nom) |
imported>Gerda Arendt (appr) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
--> | --> | ||
| − | * ... that in a dissenting opinion, [[Justice Scalia]] wrote that the [[US Supreme Court]] had '''[[Lafler v. Cooper|elevated "plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement"]]'''? | + | * <s>... that in a dissenting opinion, [[Justice Scalia]] wrote that the [[US Supreme Court]] had '''[[Lafler v. Cooper|elevated "plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement"]]'''? </s> <small>Source: "Today, however, the Supreme Court of the United States elevates plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement." ({{ussc|566|156|2012|pin=186}})</small> |
| − | ** '''ALT1''':... that when dissenting from the [[US Supreme Court]]'s decision in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', [[Justice Scalia]] wrote that the Court had elevated "plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement"? <small>Source: "Today, however, the Supreme Court of the United States elevates plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement." ({{ussc|566|156|2012|pin=186}})</small> | + | ** '''ALT1''': ... that when dissenting from the [[US Supreme Court]]'s decision in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', [[Justice Scalia]] wrote that the Court had elevated "plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement"? <small>Source: "Today, however, the Supreme Court of the United States elevates plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement." ({{ussc|566|156|2012|pin=186}})</small> |
| − | ** '''ALT2''':... that the [[US Supreme Court]] created a new body of constitutional law in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]'''? <small> Source: "the court has created a new body of constitutional law" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html]</small> | + | ** '''ALT2''':<s>... that the [[US Supreme Court]] created a new body of constitutional law in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]'''?</s> <small> Source: "the court has created a new body of constitutional law" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html]</small> |
| − | ** '''ALT3''':... that in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', the [[US Supreme Court]] held that criminal convictions can be overturned if defense counsel ineffectively [[plea bargain]]ed? <small>Source: "A divided Supreme Court ruled for the first time Wednesday that the guarantee of effective legal representation applies to plea bargain agreements" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html?utm_term=.cf834d779007]) </small> | + | ** '''ALT3''':<s>... that in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', the [[US Supreme Court]] held that criminal convictions can be overturned if defense counsel ineffectively [[plea bargain]]ed?</s> <small>Source: "A divided Supreme Court ruled for the first time Wednesday that the guarantee of effective legal representation applies to plea bargain agreements" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html?utm_term=.cf834d779007]) </small> |
| − | ** '''ALT4''':... that in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', the [[US Supreme Court]] held that criminal defendants have a [[constitutional]] right to an effective lawyer when [[plea bargain]]ing? <small>Source: "A divided Supreme Court ruled for the first time Wednesday that the guarantee of effective legal representation applies to plea bargain agreements" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html?utm_term=.cf834d779007])</small> | + | ** '''ALT4''':<s>... that in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', the [[US Supreme Court]] held that criminal defendants have a [[constitutional]] right to an effective lawyer when [[plea bargain]]ing?</s> <small>Source: "A divided Supreme Court ruled for the first time Wednesday that the guarantee of effective legal representation applies to plea bargain agreements" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html?utm_term=.cf834d779007])</small> |
:* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Kyrö Distillery Company]] | :* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Kyrö Distillery Company]] | ||
:* ''Comment'': I'm aware of the neutrality complications from quoting from only one justice, so I proposed a number of other hooks. My only concern is that I can't seem to think of any brilliant, ''per se'' "hooky" hooks at the moment. Best, '''[[User:L235|Kevin]]''' (<small>aka</small> [[User:L235|L235]] '''·'''  [[User talk:L235#top|t]] '''·'''  [[Special:Contribs/L235|c]]) 02:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC) | :* ''Comment'': I'm aware of the neutrality complications from quoting from only one justice, so I proposed a number of other hooks. My only concern is that I can't seem to think of any brilliant, ''per se'' "hooky" hooks at the moment. Best, '''[[User:L235|Kevin]]''' (<small>aka</small> [[User:L235|L235]] '''·'''  [[User talk:L235#top|t]] '''·'''  [[Special:Contribs/L235|c]]) 02:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC) | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
--> | --> | ||
| − | : | + | : [[File:Symbol voting keep.svg|16px]] Substantial article on good sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. I like the quote, because I think it shows best for the average reader what's going on, but I don't like it bolded, - the topic is the case, not the quote. Therefore ALT1. --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 12:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC) |
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | }}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | ||
Revision as of 12:24, 3 March 2018
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Lafler v. Cooper
... that in a dissenting opinion, Justice Scalia wrote that the US Supreme Court had elevated "plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement"?Source: "Today, however, the Supreme Court of the United States elevates plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement." (Template:Ussc)- ALT1: ... that when dissenting from the US Supreme Court's decision in Lafler v. Cooper, Justice Scalia wrote that the Court had elevated "plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement"? Source: "Today, however, the Supreme Court of the United States elevates plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement." (Template:Ussc)
- ALT2:
... that the US Supreme Court created a new body of constitutional law in Lafler v. Cooper?Source: "the court has created a new body of constitutional law" ([1] - ALT3:
... that in Lafler v. Cooper, the US Supreme Court held that criminal convictions can be overturned if defense counsel ineffectively plea bargained?Source: "A divided Supreme Court ruled for the first time Wednesday that the guarantee of effective legal representation applies to plea bargain agreements" ([2]) - ALT4:
... that in Lafler v. Cooper, the US Supreme Court held that criminal defendants have a constitutional right to an effective lawyer when plea bargaining?Source: "A divided Supreme Court ruled for the first time Wednesday that the guarantee of effective legal representation applies to plea bargain agreements" ([3])
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Kyrö Distillery Company
- Comment: I'm aware of the neutrality complications from quoting from only one justice, so I proposed a number of other hooks. My only concern is that I can't seem to think of any brilliant, per se "hooky" hooks at the moment. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 02:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Moved to mainspace by L235 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC).
Substantial article on good sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. I like the quote, because I think it shows best for the average reader what's going on, but I don't like it bolded, - the topic is the case, not the quote. Therefore ALT1. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)