Law Commons^™

Computationally Assessing Suspicion, Wesley M. Oliver

Law Faculty Publications

Law enforcement officers performing drug interdiction on interstate highways have to decide nearly every day whether there is reasonable suspicion to detain motorists until a trained dog can sniff for the presence of drugs. The officers’ assessments are often wrong, however, and lead to unnecessary detentions of innocent persons and the suppression of drugs found on guilty ones. We propose a computational method of evaluating suspicion in these encounters and offer experimental results from early efforts demonstrating its feasibility. With the assistance of large language and predictive machine learning models, it appears that judges, advocates, and even police officers could …

Charles Lindergh, Caryl Chessman, And The Exception Proving The (Potentially Waning) Rule Of Broad Prosecutorial Discretion, Wesley M. Oliver

Law Faculty Publications

Perhaps ever since legislatures started defining crimes, they have given prosecutors a variety of ways to prosecute the same conduct. Courts have, almost without exception, deferred to legislatures' broad definitions of crime. Kidnapping statutes are the exception. The high profile execution of Caryl Chessman in 1960 for kidnapping prompted considerable scholarly criticism and prompted courts nationwide to impose limiting constructions on kidnapping statutes. Recently, scholars have called for a curb in prosecutorial discretion generally, attributing the explosion in the prison population to broad criminal codes, mandatory minimums, and sentencing guidelines that provide prosecutors leverage in plea negotiations. In the last …

Standards Of Legitimacy In Criminal Negotiations, Wesley M. Oliver, Rishi Batra

Law Faculty Publications

Scholarship on negotiation theory and practice is rich and well-developed. Almost no work has been done, however, to translateto the criminal context the lessons learned about negotiationfrom extensive empirical study using the disciplines of econom-ics, game theory, and psychology. This Article suggests that de-fense lawyers in criminal negotiations can employ toolsfrequently useful to negotiators in other arenas: neutral criteria as a standard of legitimacy. Judges sometimes exercise a type of discretion analogous to prosecutorial discretion. When they do so, they offer an independent, reasoned, and publicly available assessment of the factors that a prosecutor ought to consider in deciding whether …

Limiting Criminal Law’S “In For A Penny, In For A Pound” Doctrine, Wesley M. Oliver

Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court took two cases this Term involving doctrines of criminal law typically dealt with by state courts, and in each of them, it limited criminal liability for harms not attributable to a defendant’s culpability.

Although the Court interprets federal criminal statutes with some frequency, it rarely considers provisions of statutes that would provide persuasive authority for the interpretation of state criminal codes—at least not the most used provisions of state criminal codes. Unlike state criminal laws, federal criminal laws have jurisdictional requirements and generally have more complex components. It is typically these unique aspects of federal criminal laws …

Concert Of Action By Substantial Assistance: What Ever Happened To Unconscious Aiding And Abetting, Dana Neacsu

Law Faculty Publications

As one commentator has uncomfortably noted, in the 1980's, courts seemed inclined to develop and use theories of liability, which ensured that the risk of injury and loss was transferred from consumer victims to manufacturers and then, through the price mechanism, to the community-at-large. That was a time when courts seemed to be comfortable applying product liability without fault, and holding manufacturers as "insurers even for those products, which previously would not have been considered 'defective' in design, in manufacture, or in marketing." Since then, courts have scaled the doctrine back.