Digital Commons Network^™

The Next Era Of Sentencing Reform, Steven L. Chanenson

Steven L. Chanenson

Silence: Insolubly Ambiguous And Deadly: The Constitutional, Evidentiary And Moral Reasons For Excluding ‘Lack Of Remorse’ Testimony And Argument In Capital Sentencing Proceedings, Jules Epstein

Jules Epstein

No abstract provided.

What's Wrong With Harmless Theories Of Punishment, Kenworthey Bilz, John M. Darley

Kenworthey Bilz

This paper argues that both consequentialist and retributivist punishment philosophies rest on similar analyses of the social value of punishable behavior; that is, they both rest on definitions of what counts as a “harm” of crime. The different outcomes the different philosophies produce stem from competing conclusions about which of those harms are empirically valid or morally legitimate. Once we have spelled out what counts as the harms of crime, however, retributivist and consequentialist philosophies add little to the equation. Alternative punishment regimes at their best are up front about offering a distinctive account of the harms of crime. When …

Criminal Case Complexity: An Empirical Perspective, Michael Heise

Michael Heise

Criminal case complexity persists as a central tenet in many academic and public critiques of our legal system even though little is known about two critical questions. One question is whether key actors (juries, attorneys, and judges) view case complexity similarly. In other words, do juries, attorneys, and judges agree on whether a case is complex? A second question involves the determinants of case complexity for each group. That is, what factors make a case more (or less) complex for juries, attorneys, and judges. This article explores both questions from an empirical perspective with the benefit of recent data from …

Get The Facts, Jack! Empirical Research And The Changing Constitutional Landscape Of Consent Searches, Steven L. Chanenson

Steven L. Chanenson

No abstract provided.

Implementing Nj's Anti-Terrorism Laws To Prevent Terrorist Financing: A Statutory Analysis Of The September 11, 2001 Anti-Terrorism Act, James B. Johnston

James B Johnston

The 9/11 hijackers received much of the money they used to implement their plan of murder by funnelling money sent to them by Al Qaeda opertives to banks located in NJ. As a result the NJ legislature signed off on powerful terrorist financing legislation when it passed the September 11, 2001 Anto Terrorism Act. This article provides a step by step analysis of these new statutes and discusses other state legislation that can allow law enforcement to confiscate money linked to terrorism.

Terrorism And The Financial Sector: Are The Right Prosecutorial Tools Being Used?, Stefan D. Cassella

Stefan D Cassella

The article suggests that the statutes enacted to deal specifically with terrorist financing are not always the most appropriate vehicles either for bringing criminal charges or recovering assets under the forfeiture laws, but that most traditional and generic statutes, such as those dealing with money laundering, bulk cash smuggling and currency reporting violations might be more effective in most cases.

Bulk Cash Smuggling And The Globalization Of Crime, Stefan D. Cassella

Stefan D Cassella

The articles discusses the legislative history of the bulk cash smuggling statute, 31 U.S.C. 5332, and constitutional issues raised under the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment when the government seeks to use the statute to forfeit the currency being smuggled.

The Forfeiture Of Property Involved In Money Laundering Offenses, Stefan D. Cassella

Stefan D Cassella

The article discusses in detail the legal theories that the government uses to forfeit property involved in money laundering offenses under both the civil and criminal forfeiture laws. The money laundering offenses include violations of 18 U.S.C. 1956 and 1957, as well as the anti-structuring and bulk cash smuggling statutes in Title 31.