Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
- File Type
Articles 1 - 15 of 15
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The System Of Modern Criminal Conspiracy, Steven R. Morrison
The System Of Modern Criminal Conspiracy, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
Something has changed in the modern system of American criminal conspiracy law compared to its prior iterations. This article explores that change, arguing that the system of modern criminal conspiracy now gives to the government such great discretion to charge and prove a conspiracy that unpopular ideas and the speech that expresses them have become ready subjects of prosecution. At its center, this article defines the system of modern conspiracy law, which is one of uniformity rather than dynamism. Where dynamic systems of law contain distinct components that perform different tasks (proving actus reus and mens rea, for example), the …
Requiring Proof Of Conspiratorial Dangerousness, Steven R. Morrison
Requiring Proof Of Conspiratorial Dangerousness, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
It is overwhelmingly assumed that criminal conspiracies pose a “distinct evil” that justifies criminalizing them and providing prosecution-friendly rules of evidence in their proof. Professor Neal Kumar Katyal’s defense of conspiracy law rests on this assumption, but Professor Abraham S. Goldstein’s seminal critique notes that it has never been empirically shown to be true. This article argues that to impose criminal liability, prosecutors ought to be required to prove a conspiracy’s dangerousness. In doing so, it also provides insight into conspiracy law that Katyal and Goldstein leave unilluminated. Their opinions on conspiracy’s dangerousness diverge because they assume different group data …
Requiring Dangerousness: An Idea Whose Time Has Come (Again), Steven R. Morrison
Requiring Dangerousness: An Idea Whose Time Has Come (Again), Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
It is overwhelmingly assumed that criminal conspiracies pose a “distinct evil,” which justifies criminalizing them and providing prosecution-friendly rules of evidence in their proof. Professor Neal Kumar Katyal’s excellent defense of conspiracy law rests on this assumption, but Professor Abraham S. Goldstein’s seminal critique notes that it has never been empirically shown to be true. This Article rejects the distinct evil assumption by showing how Katyal’s and Goldstein’s respective frames lead to their divergent conclusions. It argues that to satisfy both commentators’ legitimate concerns, conspiracies must be shown to be dangerous before criminal liability can attach. This requirement was included …
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
Conspiracy law has been the consistent subject of controversy, but most commentators do not consider its negative effect on freedom of speech. When they do, their concerns focus only on the use of speech as the crime’s actus reus. The use of speech as evidence to prove this actus reus is as important and raises conceptually related issues, so current scholarship tells only half of the story. This Article addresses the use of speech as the actus reus of conspiracy and evidence thereof. It sets forth what I call the All-Purpose Speech Model. I argue that this Model accurately describes …
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
Conspiracy law has been the consistent subject of controversy, but most commentators do not consider its negative effect on freedom of speech. When they do, their concerns focus only on the use of speech as the crime’s actus reus. The use of speech as evidence to prove this actus reus is as important and raises conceptually related issues, so current scholarship tells only half of the story. This Article addresses the use of speech as the actus reus of conspiracy and evidence thereof. It sets forth what I call the All-Purpose Speech Model. I argue that this Model accurately describes …
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
Conspiracy law has been the consistent subject of controversy, but most commentators do not consider its negative effect on freedom of speech. When they do, their concerns focus only on the use of speech as the crime’s actus reus. The use of speech as evidence to prove this actus reus is as important and raises conceptually related issues, so current scholarship tells only half of the story. This Article addresses the use of speech as the actus reus of conspiracy and evidence thereof. It sets forth what I call the All-Purpose Speech Model. I argue that this Model accurately describes …
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
Conspiracy law has been the consistent subject of controversy, but most commentators do not consider its negative effect on freedom of speech. When they do, their concerns focus only on the use of speech as the crime’s actus reus. The use of speech as evidence to prove this actus reus is as important and raises conceptually related issues, so current scholarship tells only half of the story. This Article addresses the use of speech as the actus reus of conspiracy and evidence thereof. It sets forth what I call the All-Purpose Speech Model. I argue that this Model accurately describes …
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
Conspiracy law has been the consistent subject of controversy, but most commentators do not consider its negative effect on freedom of speech. When they do, their concerns focus only on the use of speech as the crime’s actus reus. The use of speech as evidence to prove this actus reus is as important and raises conceptually related issues, so current scholarship tells only half of the story. This Article addresses the use of speech as the actus reus of conspiracy and evidence thereof. It sets forth what I call the All-Purpose Speech Model. I argue that this Model accurately describes …
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
Conspiracy law has been the consistent subject of controversy, but most commentators do not consider its negative effect on freedom of speech. When they do, their concerns focus only on the use of speech as the crime’s actus reus. The use of speech as evidence to prove this actus reus is as important and raises conceptually related issues, so current scholarship tells only half of the story. This Article addresses the use of speech as the actus reus of conspiracy and evidence thereof. It sets forth what I call the All-Purpose Speech Model. I argue that this Model accurately describes …
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
Conspiracy law has been the consistent subject of controversy, but most commentators do not consider its negative effect on freedom of speech. When they do, their concerns focus only on the use of speech as the crime’s actus reus. The use of speech as evidence to prove this actus reus is as important and raises conceptually related issues, so current scholarship tells only half of the story. This Article addresses the use of speech as the actus reus of conspiracy and evidence thereof. It sets forth what I call the All-Purpose Speech Model. I argue that this Model accurately describes …
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Conspiracy Law's Threat To Free Speech, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
Conspiracy law has been the consistent subject of controversy, but most commentators do not consider its negative effect on freedom of speech. When they do, their concerns focus only on the use of speech as the crime’s actus reus. The use of speech as evidence to prove this actus reus is as important and raises conceptually related issues, so current scholarship tells only half of the story. This Article addresses the use of speech as the actus reus of conspiracy and evidence thereof. It sets forth what I call the All-Purpose Speech Model. I argue that this Model accurately describes …
Toward A History Of American Criminal Law Theory, Steven R. Morrison
Toward A History Of American Criminal Law Theory, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
Abstract to “Toward a History of American Criminal Law Theory” By Steven R. Morrison This article describes the author’s formulation of the Field of Truth. The Field of Truth is a theoretical concept that does two things. First, it is designed to facilitate the study of the historical progress of American criminal law theory. It is a structure that is neutral, because it does not evaluate the merits of any particular theory and does not limit its reach to modes of thought generally accepted by scholars as “theory.” Therefore, the structure encompasses all ideas that have affected the criminal law. …
Compassion And The Criminal Defense Attorney, Steven R. Morrison
Compassion And The Criminal Defense Attorney, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
No abstract provided.
The Fourth Amendment’S Applicability To Residents Of Homeless Shelters, Steven R. Morrison
The Fourth Amendment’S Applicability To Residents Of Homeless Shelters, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
The extent to which residents of homeless shelters are protected by the Fourth Amendment in these shelters is an unsettled question of law because virtually no case law exists to establish or define this protection. Shelters are homes to homeless persons, and homeless persons are often quite vulnerable and in need of the security that well-defined Fourth Amendment jurisprudence provides. This article, therefore, examines the extent to which homeless persons should enjoy Fourth Amendment protections in homeless shelters. It applies settled Fourth Amendment law, conceptual approaches to the Fourth Amendment, and judicial opinions dealing with the Fourth Amendment and homeless …
When Is Lying Illegal? When Should It Be? A Critical Analysis Of The Federal False Statements Act, Steven R. Morrison
When Is Lying Illegal? When Should It Be? A Critical Analysis Of The Federal False Statements Act, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
This article examines the federal False Statements Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2), from the standpoints of judicial interpretation, the law’s history, legislative history and congressional intent, public policy, and criminal law theory. It concludes that the dominant judicial interpretations do not accord with congressional intent to create a limited and targeted law. The statute as interpreted is extraordinarily broad such that it should be—but has not been and probably won’t be—declared unconstitutionally vague. Whether the law is unconstitutional or not, as interpreted it does not support wise public policy nor does it accord with dominant theories of criminal law. This …