Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Note: The Earthquake That Will Move Sentencing Discretion Back To The Judiciary? Blakely V. Washington And Sentencing Guidelines In Minnesota, Matthew R. Kuhn
Note: The Earthquake That Will Move Sentencing Discretion Back To The Judiciary? Blakely V. Washington And Sentencing Guidelines In Minnesota, Matthew R. Kuhn
William Mitchell Law Review
This Note begins by briefly laying out the evolution of criminal sentencing over the past century. It then surveys judicial interpretation of defendants’ Constitutional rights as they relate to sentencing procedure, focusing on the Court’s recent invalidation of Washington state’s sentencing guidelines in Blakely v. Washington. The note will then examine possible reforms to Minnesota’s sentencing guidelines pursuant to the Court’s decision. It will conclude by advocating that, despite the recent spotlight on Kansas’s sentencing guidelines, Minnesota’s best response to Blakely is to return some sentencing discretion to the judiciary by implementing a system of voluntary guidelines.
Toward A Conceptual Framework For Assessing Police Power Commitment Legislation, Eric S. Janus
Toward A Conceptual Framework For Assessing Police Power Commitment Legislation, Eric S. Janus
Faculty Scholarship
Recent litigation and scholarship have begun to focus on the substantive limits of the state's power to use civil commitment as a social control tool. Courts and commentators describe civil commitment as grounded on two powers of the state: the parens patriae interest and the police power. This Article seeks an analytical framework for defining the boundaries of police power commitments in which justification rests on the interests of the public rather than on the interests of the committed individual.
Fourth Amendment Applicability, John O. Sonsteng
Fourth Amendment Applicability, John O. Sonsteng
Faculty Scholarship
A large percentage of fourth amendment litigation involves the issues of applicability to place, waiver/consent, and the reasonable expectation of privacy. Not one of these issues, however, has the remotest thing to do with the ultimate substance of the fourth amendment protection itself. They deal exclusively with the threshold question of whether the fourth amendment is even involved. Only if it is, do the actual requirements of the fourth amendment become material. This article examines the applicability of the fourth amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizures with respect to these common issues.