Volume 60, Issue 1 (October 2012)
Posted By UCLA Law Review On November 2, 2012 @ 7:11 pm In Constitutional Law,Criminal Law,Criminal Procedure,Evidence Law,Intellectual Property,International & Comparative Law,Law Rev (UCLA),Privacy,Privacy (Medical) | No Comments
[1]
Volume 60, Issue 1 (October 2012)
Articles
| Not This Child: Constitutional Questions in Regulating Noninvasive Prenatal Genetic Diagnosis and Selective Abortion [2] | Jaime Staples King | 2 |
| A Labor Paradigm for Human Trafficking [3] | Hila Shamir | 76 |
| Prosecutors Hide, Defendants Seek: The Erosion of Brady Through the Defendant Due Diligence Rule [4] | Kate Weisburd | 138 |
Comments
Article printed from Concurring Opinions: http://www.concurringopinions.com
URL to article: http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2012/11/volume-60-issue-1-october-2012.html
URLs in this post:
[1] Image: http://www.uclalawreview.org
[2] Not This Child: Constitutional Questions in Regulating Noninvasive Prenatal Genetic Diagnosis and Selective Abortion: http://www.uclalawreview.org/?p=3904
[3] A Labor Paradigm for Human Trafficking: http://www.uclalawreview.org/?p=3902
[4] Prosecutors Hide, Defendants Seek: The Erosion of Brady Through the Defendant Due Diligence Rule: http://www.uclalawreview.org/?p=3900
[5] Trade Dress Protection for Cuisine: Monetizing Creativity in a Low-IP Industry: http://www.uclalawreview.org/?p=3897
[6] What Happens in the Jury Room Stays in the Jury Room . . . but Should It?: A Conflict Between the Sixth Amendment and Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b): http://www.uclalawreview.org/?p=3895
Click here to print.