Christopher Johnson has dug deeply into a neglected corner of comparative law and emerged with some fascinating and important contrasts. Finland does not appear often on the radar screen of American legal scholars, even those who primarily focus is comparative law. And so we are indebted to Johnson for reminding us that critical comparative insights can arise out of studying the experiences of nations deemed “marginal” to the international system, and to mainstream comparative law scholarship (which itself occupies a position of uncertain import in American legal scholarship generally). Johnson’s findings are all the more significant because they come from one who, as the Chief Appellate Defender for the state of New Hampshire, bridges the gap between the legal academy and the practice of the law, and who is deeply versed in the workings of American appellate criminal procedure.
Malick W. Ghachem,
A Comment on Christopher Johnson's "Post-trial Judicial Review of Criminal Convictions: A Comparative Study of the United States and Finland",
Me. L. Rev.
Available at: http://digitalcommons.mainelaw.maine.edu/mlr/vol64/iss2/6