Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Capital punishment (2)
- Death penalty (2)
- Case selection effects (1)
- Co-perpetration (1)
- Control theory of perpetration (1)
-
- Delaware (1)
- Empirical legal studies (1)
- ICC (1)
- ICTY (1)
- IJA (1)
- ISC (1)
- Indirect co-perpetration (1)
- Indirect perpetration (1)
- Israel Judicial Authority (1)
- Israel Supreme Court (1)
- Israeli judiciary (1)
- JCE (1)
- Johnson v. United States (1)
- Joint criminal enterprise (1)
- Judge effects (1)
- Lafler v. Cooper (1)
- Missouri v. Frye (1)
- Modes of liability (1)
- Nullum crimen sine lege (1)
- Piracy (1)
- Plea bargaining (1)
- UNCLOS (1)
- Universal jurisdiction (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Plea Bargaining And The Right To The Effective Assistance Of Counsel: Where The Rubber Hits The Road In Capital Cases, John H. Blume
Plea Bargaining And The Right To The Effective Assistance Of Counsel: Where The Rubber Hits The Road In Capital Cases, John H. Blume
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The Delaware Death Penalty: An Empirical Study, Sheri Johnson, John H. Blume, Theodore Eisenberg, Valerie P. Hans, Martin T. Wells
The Delaware Death Penalty: An Empirical Study, Sheri Johnson, John H. Blume, Theodore Eisenberg, Valerie P. Hans, Martin T. Wells
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
For the last five years, we have conducted an empirical study of the “modern era” of capital punishment in Delaware. By “modern era,” we refer to the time period after the Supreme Court’s 1972 decision in Furman v.Georgia, which invalidated all then-existing state death penalty regimes. Some readers might ask, “Why Delaware?” They might observe that it is a small state and is not a significant national player in terms of death sentences imposed or death row inmates executed. While both are true, several features of Delaware’s capital punishment system intrigue us. First, Delaware has a high death sentencing rate. …
Second-Order Linking Principles: Combining Vertical And Horizontal Modes Of Liability, Jens David Ohlin
Second-Order Linking Principles: Combining Vertical And Horizontal Modes Of Liability, Jens David Ohlin
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
Both the ICTY and the ICC have struggled to combine vertical and horizontal modes of liability. At the ICTY, the question has primarily arisen within the context of ‘leadership-level’ JCEs and how to express their relationship with the Relevant Physical Perpetrators of the crimes. The ICC addressed the is-sue by combining indirect perpetration with co-perpetration to form a new mode of liability known as indirect co-perpetration. The following article argues that these novel combinations — vertical and horizontal modes of liability — cannot be simply asserted; they must be defended at the level of criminal law theory. Unfortunately, courts that …
Piracy Prosecutions In National Courts, Maggie Gardner
Piracy Prosecutions In National Courts, Maggie Gardner
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
At least for the time being, the international community must rely on national courts to prosecute modern-day pirates. The first wave of domestic piracy prosecutions suggests, however, that domestic courts have yet to achieve the necessary consistency and expertise in resolving key questions of international law in these cases. This article evaluates how courts trying modern-day pirates have addressed common questions of international law regarding the exercise of universal jurisdiction, the elements of the crime of piracy, and the principle of nullum crimen sine lege. In doing so, it evaluates five decisions issued in 2010 by courts in Kenya, the …
Does The Judge Matter? Exploiting Random Assignment On A Court Of Last Resort To Assess Judge And Case Selection Effects, Theodore Eisenberg, Talia Fisher, Issi Rosen-Zvi
Does The Judge Matter? Exploiting Random Assignment On A Court Of Last Resort To Assess Judge And Case Selection Effects, Theodore Eisenberg, Talia Fisher, Issi Rosen-Zvi
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
We study 1,410 mandatory jurisdiction and 48 discretionary jurisdiction criminal law case outcomes in cases appealed to the Israel Supreme Court in 2006 and 2007 to assess influences on case outcomes. A methodological innovation is accounting for factors - case specialization, seniority, and workload - that modify random case assignment. To the extent one accounts for nonrandom assignment, one can infer that case outcome differences are judge effects. In mandatory jurisdiction cases, individual justices cast 3,986 votes and differed by as much as 15 percent in the probability of casting a vote favoring defendants. Female justices were about 2 to …