Law Commons^™

Symposium Transcript

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

No abstract provided.

Unshackled: Stories Of Redemption Among Serious Youth Offenders, Julie E. Mcconnell

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

In a series of decisions concerning child defendants, the United States Supreme

Court has embraced the understanding, based on adolescent brain

development, that the legal system must recognize children are different than

adults concerning criminal culpability and sentencing. That recognition, culminating

in Miller v. Alabama and Montgomery v. Louisiana, led to the opportunity

for thousands of individuals across the country, initially sentenced

to death-in-prison sentences when they were minors, to gain a meaningful

opportunity for release. These cases permanently banned mandatory life sentences

for children. In Virginia, the legislature now allows reconsideration

of these cases through hearings before the parole …

Empowering The Defense To Confront The Government's Powers: Virginia Criminal Justice Legal Reform, Bryan Kennedy, Catherine F. Zagurskie

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

During the 2021 Session and 2021 Special Session, Virginia took steps to

restore the balance between individuals ensnared in the criminal legal system

and the government. These new laws allow people who are involved in

the criminal legal system to emphasize their humanity and to hold the government

to its various burdens at all stages of the case, including pre-trial,

trials, sentencing, and appeal. This article discusses four of the most important

changes to Virginia law that ensure a more level playing field between

the government and the accused.

First, eliminating the presumption against bail challenges the government’s

power of …

A Call For Justice: Virginia's Need For Criminal Discovery Reform, Douglas A. Ramseur

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

In order for the promise of a strong and reliable criminal justice system to work properly in Virginia, there must be strong and prepared advocates on both sides of the process. The current process of discovery for criminal cases in Virginia fosters a culture of secrecy and unpreparedness that should not be tolerated in a system that has such power over the lives of every person in this state. It is far past the time for Virginia to move forward on criminal discovery reform. The current rules for criminal discovery in Virginia were first adopted in 1972. The rules do …

Quarreling Over Quarles: Limiting The Extension Of The Public Safety Exception, Andrew T. Winkler

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

This article addresses the issue of whether the Quarles public safety exception applies after a suspect invokes his Fifth Amendment right to counsel. Due to the lack of guidance in the Quarles opinion, lower courts have expressed confusion as to whether the public safety exception applies to Edwards. Several courts have extended the exception, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth and Ninth Circuits, while some state appellate courts have declined to do so. Part II of this article provides the requisite background for understanding Miranda's Fifth Amendment right to counsel, the Edwards rule, and the Quarles public …

Courts Re-Examine The Application Of Goldfinger-Era Electronic Tracking Cases To Law Enforcement Use Of Gps Tracking Devices, Joshua A. Engel

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

GPS tracking devices have become inexpensive, small, and can easily be attached to a vehicle quickly. Law enforcement is increasingly using these devices to track the exact location of a suspect's vehicle over a long period of time. In most instances, relying on Supreme Court cases from the early 1980's, law enforcement has not sought a warrant before using these devices. This paper examines how courts have attempted to apply Supreme Court precedents based on "primitive" tracking devices to modern GPS tracking devices. These precedents established that the use of electronic tracking devices on vehicles did not constitute a search …

Automobile Consent Searches: The Driver's Options In A Lose-Lose Situation, Arthur J. Park

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

"Do you mind if I take a quick look in the vehicle?" This is a question that countless Americans hear every day, but very few citizens understand the ramifications of their answer. How long can the officer keep me here? What if there is something in my car that I do not know about? Can I be arrested if I refuse the search? This article will address the legal context surrounding consent searches of automobiles in order to provide some clarity to drivers and passengers that are put in this lose-lose situation.

"You Think He Got Shot - Did You Maybe Shoot Him By Accident?": Linguistic Manipulation Of The Communicatively Immature During Police Interrogations, Kathryn C. Donoghue

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

It is undeniable that "punishment of the innocent makes a mockery of the law." Police who linguistically coerce false confessions from communicatively immature suspects mock the criminal justice system by evading accountability and convicting the vulnerable. This paper documents how common linguistic strategies directed at certain vulnerable groups have the potential to elicit false confessions. Part II reviews linguistic strategies routinely employed by trained interrogators. Part III then explores how mentally challenged and juvenile suspects, otherwise known as communicatively immature groups, are more susceptible to deceptive linguistic strategies. Part IV discusses how interrogators learn to extract confessions, while Part V …

Police Shootings Under The Fourth Amendment, Wayne C. Beyer

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

The Fourth Amendment permits police to use deadly force when there is an imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death to themselves or others. Although the governing standard is well established in a general way, its application to particular facts and circumstances may not be clear to officers on the street. Unless a reasonable police officer would have understood that his/her decision to shoot was clearly constitutionally prohibited, the officer may be entitled to qualified immunity, a decision that the court can make on summary judgment before trial. Discussed first are shootings that are not subject to Fourth Amendment …

Hiibel V. Sixth Judicial District Court:Can Police Arrest Suspects For Withholding Their Names?, John Famum

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

Suppose that someone calls the police and alerts them to a crime that has been committed. Using the information provided, the police stop you because you fit the description of the person reported. If the police ask your name, must you give it? The United States Supreme Court believes you must if the state you are in has passed a law requiring you to give your name. In a factual situation very similar to this, the United States Supreme Court held in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court that the Nevada law requiring a person to provide his name in …

America's War On Drugs And Guns: The Detriments Of The Possession Standard In The Context Of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, Christan C. Rhoton

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

America's "War on Drugs" has resulted in federal legislation and sentencing guidelines that provide harsh penalties for crimes involving both drugs and guns. In particular, Title 18, Section 924(c)(1)(A) of the United States Code, which applies specifically to guns in the context of drug-related offenses, establishes mandatory punishments, ranging from five years to ten years imprisonment, depending upon the defendant's use or possession of the firearm. Congress amended Section 924 to include the term "possession" several years after the United States Supreme Court's decision in Bailey v. United States. The United States Supreme Court interpreted the "use" requirement of Section …

Tip-Based Warrantless Searches And Seizures Under The Rubric Of The Investigativedetention Exception To The Warrant Requirement: What Law Enforcementpersonnel Must Understand About Exclusion And Training, Brian Decker

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Dickerson And The Future Of Miranda, Brenda E. Mallinak

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

Dickerson v. United States is one such case where the Fourth Circuit considered §3501 sua sponte and applied the statute in the absence of Miranda warnings. This action by the Fourth Circuit raises four issues which will be addressed in this paper. Part I addresses the issue of whether the federal executive branch can decline to enforce a law passed by Congress will be examined, as well as the related question of whether, in the face of executive refusal to use a law, can the courts sua sponte rely on that law to decide a case. In Part 11 the …