Charles Weisselberg quoted by Daily Journal (registration required), April 23, 2018
“If discovery goes forward, it’s inconceivable to me that Cohen would testify while a federal criminal investigation is ongoing,” Weisselberg said. “I would be very surprised if he didn’t take the nickel.”
Charles Weisselberg quoted by San Francisco Chronicle, April 5, 2018
Two Bay Area law professors told The Chronicle last month that Schaaf’s warning about the ICE operation was so vague that it would probably not put her in jeopardy of being charged with obstruction. It might be different if she gave particular people specific details of a secret operation, said UC Berkeley law Professor Charles Weisselberg.
Charles Weisselberg quoted by The Seattle Times, Feb. 25, 2018
Had Schaaf given particular people specific details of a secret operation and advised them to leave, her actions might have gotten closer to obstruction of justice, said University of California, Berkeley law Professor Charles Weisselberg.
Charles Denton and Charles Weisselberg quoted by The Daily Californian, Oct. 22, 2017
Although defendants representing themselves do not belong to the law profession, they are held to the same courtroom standards, Denton said. He added that, while the process is traumatic for the victim, the defense is less effective compared to attorney representation.
Charles Weisselberg … said that with self-representing defendants, cross-examination objectives remain the same with or without a representative lawyer — to “undermine the credibility of the witness or draw out points that would support the defense.”
Robert Cole, Jesse Choper, and Charles Weisselberg quoted by California Magazine, June 22, 2017
“Even if Trump is impeached and removed from office, you end up with President Pence,” says Cole, “and most Democrats would probably not consider that an improvement. … The Democrats should be concentrating on 2018, identifying the districts where they have a chance, and developing a positive program that engages voters. Simply being against Trump isn’t enough.”
“In fact, the only thing I see so far that could tip the scale would be if substantial evidence emerged showing he knew the Russians were working to influence the election in his favor,” says Choper. “That could either force him to resign or convince the House to impeach and the Senate to convict. Other than that—it just seems unlikely to me.”
“There has been considerable debate about whether a sitting president can be charged with criminal offenses,” says Weisselberg. “Many argue the Constitution implicitly provides impeachment as the sole process for removing a serving president. However, a president who resigns or is removed from office can then be criminally prosecuted.”
Charles Weisselberg quoted by Daily Journal (registration required), Dec. 6, 2016
Charles Weisselberg … who argued to the high court on behalf of Macabeo, said a ruling for the government would have eroded privacy rights for millions of Californians. “Officers cannot simply search anyone stopped for any infraction,” Weisselberg said. “The state was arguing that probable cause for arrest justifies a full search.”
Charles Weisselberg quoted by Voice of San Diego, Sacramento Report, August 5, 2016
“I know that not every lawyer provides pro bono assistance over the course of his or her career,” said Charles Weisselberg, a professor and former associate dean at UC Berkeley School of Law. “But inculcating that value early is important and will, I believe, assist these fledgling lawyers over the course of their careers.”
Charles Weisselberg cited by ABA Journal, August 2, 2016
Scholars, such as Berkeley Law Professor Charles Weisselberg, reviewed police training with regard to interrogations and documented that officers were instructed as to how to circumvent the Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona. Will officers now be encouraged to engage in illegal stops knowing that if an old arrest warrant is found, then anything found in a subsequent search likely would be admissible as evidence?
Charles Weisselberg quoted in Daily Journal (registration required), Oct. 13, 2015
Luis v. United States, takes on an even narrower question. … Though Luis won’t apply to civil cases or administrative proceedings, Weisselberg said, the court’s opinion may reveal whether the court feels the government is overly aggressive in seizing assets before adjudication.
Charles Weisselberg interviewed for Daily Journal (registration required), June 26, 2015
“The Court is on very solid ground in ruling that questions about gang affiliation amount to ‘interrogation’ within the meaning of Miranda.”