Law Commons^™

Neuroscience, Criminal Sentencing, And Human Rights, Elizabeth Shaw

William & Mary Law Review

This Article discusses ways in which neuroscience should inform criminal sentencing in the future. Specifically, it compares the ethical permissibility of traditional forms of punishment, such as incarceration, on the one hand, and rehabilitative “neurointerventions” on the other. Rehabilitative neurointerventions are interventions that aim directly to modify brain activity in order to reduce reoffending. Various jurisdictions are already using techniques that could be classed as neurointerventions, and research suggests that, potentially, an even wider range of rehabilitative neurointerventions may be developed. This Article examines the role of human rights (in particular, the moral right to mental integrity and the legal …

Beyond "Children Are Different": The Revolution In Juvenile Intake And Sentencing, Joshua Gupta-Kagan

Faculty Scholarship

For more than 120 years, juvenile justice law has not substantively defined the core questions in most delinquency cases — when should the state prosecute children rather than divert them from the court system (the intake decision), and what should the state do with children once they are convicted (the sentencing decision)? Instead, the law has granted certain legal actors wide discretion over these decisions, namely prosecutors at intake and judges at sentencing. This Article identifies and analyzes an essential reform trend changing that reality: legislation, enacted in at least eight states in the 2010s, to limit when children can …

Technology’S Influence On Federal Sentencing: Past, Present, And Future, Matthew G. Rowland

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

The comprehensive reforms that govern today’s federal sentencing processes were fashioned nearly forty years ago. Those reforms were designed to address concerns regarding the effectiveness, transparency, and fairness of the preexisting indeterminant sentencing system. Today, criticisms are mounting against the very reforms that were once held out to save the sentencing process. The more determinant system is being accused of being biased against minorities, overly harsh, and costly.

This Article explores how the criminal justice system might look to technology and build on the practical experience from the indeterminant and determinant systems. Tools such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) can help …

Supervised Release Is Not Parole, Jacob Schuman

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The United States has the largest prison population in the developed world. Yet outside prisons, there are almost twice as many people serving terms of criminal supervision in the community— probation, parole, and supervised release. At the federal level, this “mass supervision” of convicted offenders began with the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, which abolished parole and created a harsher and more expansive system called supervised release. Last term in United States v. Haymond, the Supreme Court took a small step against mass supervision by striking down one provision of the supervised release statute as violating the right to …

Distinguished Jurist-In-Residence Lecture: Sentencing Reform: When Everyone Behaves Badly, Nancy Gertner

Maine Law Review

Sentencing is different from almost all functions of the government and surely different from the other functions of the judiciary. It is the moment when state power meets an individual directly. It necessarily involves issues that are distinct from those in other areas of the law. It requires a court to focus on the defendant, to craft a punishment proportionate to the offense and to the offender. It should come as no surprise that in countries across the world, common law and civil code, totalitarian and free, judges have been given great discretion in sentencing. To be sure, that power …

An Overlooked Key To Reversing Mass Incarceration: Reforming The Law To Reduce Prosecutorial Power In Plea Bargaining, Cynthia Alkon

Cynthia Alkon

The need to “do something” about mass incarceration is now widely recognized. When President Obama announced plans to reform federal criminal legislation, he focused on the need to change how we handle non-violent drug offenders and parole violators. Previously, former Attorney General Eric Holder announced policies to make federal prosecutors “smart on crime.” These changes reflect, as President Obama noted, the increasing bipartisan consensus on the need for reform and the need to reduce our incarceration rates. However, proposals about what to reform, such as President Obama’s, tend to focus on some parts of criminal sentencing and on prosecutorial behavior …

What's Law Got To Do With It? Plea Bargaining Reform After Lafler And Frye, Cynthia Alkon

Cynthia Alkon

This symposium article responds to the question, what's left of the law in the wake of ADR? The article addresses this question in the context of the criminal justice system in the United States. As with civil cases, few criminal cases go to trial. Negotiated agreements through plea bargaining have been the predominate form of case resolution since at least the mid-twentieth century. Plea bargaining, as with other forms of alternative dispute resolution, is an informal process that operates largely outside the formal legal system. Plea bargains are rarely negotiated on the record in open court. Instead, they are usually …

Mass Incarceration: An Annotated Bibliography, Nicole P. Dyszlewski, Lucinda Harrison-Cox, Raquel Ortiz

Law Library Staff Publications

No abstract provided.

How Much Punishment Is Enough?: Embracing Uncertainty In Modern Sentencing Reform, Jalila Jefferson-Bullock

Journal of Law and Policy

This article examines federal sentencing reform and embraces the principle of uncertainty in this process. In order to properly reapportion federal criminal sentencing laws, reformers must account for the impracticality of determining appropriate incarceration lengths at sentencing. Thus, this article proposes an alternative federal sentencing model that includes a sentencing effectiveness assessment tool to help lawmakers implement rational sentences that appropriately punish offenders, prepare them to successfully reenter society, and reduce recidivism rates. Modern sentencing reform should adopt constant review and evaluation of sentencing to measure effectiveness and ensure that appropriate sentences are implemented to avoid the pitfalls of an …

Race To Incarcerate: The Causes And Consequences Of Mass Incarceration, Marc Mauer

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Alternative Visions For The Federal Criminal Justice And Corrections System: Is True Change Possible?, Nora V. Demleitner

Scholarly Articles

None available.

An Overlooked Key To Reversing Mass Incarceration: Reforming The Law To Reduce Prosecutorial Power In Plea Bargaining, Cynthia Alkon

Faculty Scholarship

The need to “do something” about mass incarceration is now widely recognized. When President Obama announced plans to reform federal criminal legislation, he focused on the need to change how we handle non-violent drug offenders and parole violators. Previously, former Attorney General Eric Holder announced policies to make federal prosecutors “smart on crime.” These changes reflect, as President Obama noted, the increasing bipartisan consensus on the need for reform and the need to reduce our incarceration rates. However, proposals about what to reform, such as President Obama’s, tend to focus on some parts of criminal sentencing and on prosecutorial behavior …

What's Law Got To Do With It? Plea Bargaining Reform After Lafler And Frye, Cynthia Alkon

Faculty Scholarship

This symposium article responds to the question, what's left of the law in the wake of ADR? The article addresses this question in the context of the criminal justice system in the United States. As with civil cases, few criminal cases go to trial. Negotiated agreements through plea bargaining have been the predominate form of case resolution since at least the mid-twentieth century. Plea bargaining, as with other forms of alternative dispute resolution, is an informal process that operates largely outside the formal legal system. Plea bargains are rarely negotiated on the record in open court. Instead, they are usually …

Crime And Punishment, A Global Concern: Who Does It Best And Does Isolation Really Work?, Melanie M. Reid

Melanie M. Reid

White-Collar Crime: Why The Sentencing Disparity Despite Uniform Guidelines?, Jon J. Lambiras

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Have We Come Full Circle? Judicial Sentencing Discretion Revived In Booker And Fanfan, Sandra D. Jordan

Pepperdine Law Review

The much anticipated Supreme Court decision in United States v. Booker and Fanfan has both invalidated the mandatory nature of the federal Sentencing Guidelines as well as restored judicial discretion for federal judges. With the Booker decision there is a renewed opportunity to correct some of the imbalance that came about as a result of the mandatory guidelines and the sentencing policies of the past twenty years. Booker has implications for all future sentencing as the power between the judiciary and the jury has been realigned and the power of the government has been reduced. Sentencing cannot accomplish legitimate goals …

The Costs Of Abusing Probationary Sentences: Overincarceration And The Erosion Of Due Process, Andrew Horwitz

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Amendment 706 To The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines: Not All It Was Cracked Up To Be, Brian Crowell

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Replacing Incarceration: The Need For Dramatic Change, Nora V. Demleitner

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

The Court Of Life And Death: The Two Tracks Of Constitutional Sentencing Law And The Case For Uniformity, Rachel E. Barkow

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court takes two very different approaches to substantive sentencing law. Whereas its review of capital sentences is robust, its oversight of noncapital sentences is virtually nonexistent. Under the Court's reading of the Constitution, states must draft death penalty statutes with enough guidance to avoid death sentences being imposed in an arbitrary and capricious manner Mandatory death sentences are disallowed, and the sentencing authority must have the opportunity to consider mitigating evidence. The Court will scrutinize whether the death sentence is proportionate to the crime and the defendant, and it has frequently exempted certain crimes and certain offenders from …

The Future Of Federal Sentencing Policy: Learning Lessons From Republican Judicial Appointees In The Guidelines Era, David M. Zlotnick

Law Faculty Scholarship

In the two years since the landmark Booker decision, federal sentencing policy has been in a state of suspended animation. This Article urges federal sentencing reform advocates to look to an unlikely source for realistic goals and ideological support --the experiences of Republican judicial appointees in the Guidelines Era. Its findings are based upon a long-term research project into cases in which Republican appointees stated their disagreement with the sentences required by law from the bench. The Article discusses the primary product of my research, forty comprehensive case profiles and their policy implications. Specifically, the Article demonstrates how the lessons …

Capital Defense Lawyers: The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly, Sean D. O'Brien

Michigan Law Review

Professor Welsh S. White's book Litigating in the Shadow of Death: Defense Attorneys in Capital Cases collects the compelling stories of "a new band of dedicated lawyers" that has "vigorously represented capital defendants, seeking to prevent their executions" (p.3). Sadly, Professor White passed away on New Year's Eve, 2005, days before the release of his final work. To the well-deserved accolades of Professor White that were recently published in the Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, I can only add a poignant comment in a student blog that captures his excellence as a scholar and educator: "I wanted to …

'Tis A Gift To Be Simple: A Model Reform Of The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Frank O. Bowman Iii

Faculty Publications

This essay introducing the June 2006 edition of the Federal Sentencing Reporter (Vol. 18, No. 5) describes two important contributions to the movement for real reform of the federal sentencing system. First, Professor Bowman summarizes the recommendations of the Constitution Project Sentencing Initiative (CPSI) report on federal sentencing. The CPSI report, reproduced in this Issue, cautions against any over-hasty legislative response to the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker, suggests some near-term improvements to the existing federal sentencing system, and then sets out a framework for a reformed and markedly simplified federal sentencing regime. Second, Professor Bowman describes …

Legislating Racial Fairness In Criminal Justice, Olatunde C.A. Johnson

Faculty Scholarship

Twenty years ago, in McCleskey v. Kemp, the Supreme Court rejected a capital defendant's claim that statistical evidence of racial discrimination in the administration of Georgia's death penalty system constituted a violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Yet, even as McCleskey effectively bars constitutional challenges to racial disparities in the criminal justice system where invidious bias is difficult to establish, the Court invites advocates to pursue legislation as a remedy to racial disparities. Indeed, the McCleskey Court offers as a rationale for its ruling the judiciary's institutional incompetence to remedy these disparities, holding that "McCleskey's arguments are best …

Booker And Our Brave New World: The Tension Among The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Judicial Discretion, And A Defendant's Constitutional Right To Trial By Jury, Kristina Walter

Cleveland State Law Review

This Note examines the inherent conflict among the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, judicial discretion, and a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury. Part two of this Note will provide a historical overview of the Guidelines. Part three will discuss the application of the Guidelines and the role of juries and judges at sentencing hearings. Part four will highlight criticisms relating to how the Guidelines often usurp power from juries and judges. Part five will examine the milestone cases of Blakely v. Washington, United States v. Booker, and United States v. Fanfan (hereinafter "Booker" refers to the combined cases …

Is There A Future For Leniency In The U.S. Criminal Justice System?, Nora V. Demleitner

Michigan Law Review

The spring 2004 release of the gruesome pictures of sexual humiliation and torture at Abu Ghraib prison outside of Baghdad revealed how some U.S. troops, intelligence officers, and private contractors treated Iraqi prisoners taken during and after the war. High-ranking government officials may have condoned, if not encouraged, the abuses. Only reluctantly have they agreed to extend protections customarily accorded civilians and military fighters during a war to individuals detained in Iraq and Afghanistan. As Congressional investigations appear to have stalled, military inquiries have been manifold but resultless. Only a handful of low ranking soldiers have been court-martialed, and a …

Constitutional Challenges, Risk-Based Analysis And Criminal History Databases: More Demands On The U.S. Sentencing Commission, Nora V. Demleitner

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

Smart Public Policy: Replacing Imprisonment With Targeted Nonprison Sentences And Collateral Sanctions, Nora V. Demleitner

Scholarly Articles

None available

Saving Federal Sentencing Reform After Apprendi, Blakely And Booker, David Yellen

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Sentencing: Learning From, And Worrying About, The States, Gerard E. Lynch

Faculty Scholarship

The Columbia Law Review's Symposium on sentencing, which took place less than two weeks after the Supreme Court's dramatic semi-invalidation of the federal sentencing guidelines, was certainly timely. Nevertheless, it is critical to understanding the Symposium's purposes to realize that it was not planned in response to United States v. Booker, or even to Blakely v. Washington. The Symposium was conceived before either case was decided, as a very conscious attempt to steer the discussion of sentencing away from Congress and the federal guidelines and toward states' experiences. The vast majority of criminals are sentenced in state …