Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Crimes (2)
- Punishment (2)
- Authority (1)
- Case studies (1)
- Convictions (1)
-
- Decision-making (1)
- Discretion (1)
- Exonerations (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Freedom of mind (1)
- Guilt (1)
- Guilty pleas (1)
- Habeas corpus (1)
- Immunity (1)
- Innocence (1)
- Legal systems (1)
- Misdemeanors (1)
- Plea bargains (1)
- Police (1)
- Postconviction challenges (1)
- Prisoners (1)
- Prosecutors (1)
- State courts (1)
- Thought crimes (1)
- Thoughts (1)
- Publication
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Divine Justice And The Library Of Babel: Or, Was Al Capone Really Punished For Tax Evasion?, Gabriel Mendlow
Divine Justice And The Library Of Babel: Or, Was Al Capone Really Punished For Tax Evasion?, Gabriel Mendlow
Articles
A criminal defendant enjoys an array of legal rights. These include the right not to be punished for an offense unless charged, tried, and proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; the right not to be punished disproportionately; and the right not to be punished for the same offense more than once. I contend that the design of our criminal legal system imperils these rights in ways few observers appreciate. Because criminal codes describe misconduct imprecisely and prohibit more misconduct than any legislature actually aspires to punish, prosecutors decide which violations of the code merit punishment, and judges decide how much …
Litigating Federal Habeas Corpus Cases: One Equitable Gateway At A Time, Eve Brensike Primus
Litigating Federal Habeas Corpus Cases: One Equitable Gateway At A Time, Eve Brensike Primus
Other Publications
Habeas corpus, also known as the Great Writ, was meant to be a “bulwark against convictions that violate fundamental fairness,” according to the Supreme Court. Yet today, federal courts provide relief in fewer than half of one percent of cases in which a non-capital state prisoner seeks relief through habeas. The Great Writ, it would seem, is no longer so great. In Litigating Federal Habeas Corpus Cases: One Equitable Gateway at a Time, Eve Brensike Primus examines the various procedural and substantive hurdles that have been erected in the past half century that make it nearly impossible for state prisoners …
Why Is It Wrong To Punish Thought?, Gabriel S. Mendlow
Why Is It Wrong To Punish Thought?, Gabriel S. Mendlow
Articles
It’s a venerable maxim of criminal jurisprudence that the state must never punish people for their mere thoughts—for their beliefs, desires, fantasies, and unexecuted intentions. This maxim is all but unquestioned, yet its true justification is something of a mystery. In this Essay, I argue that each of the prevailing justifications is deficient, and I conclude by proposing a novel one. The proposed justification captures the widely shared intuition that punishing a person for her mere thoughts isn’t simply disfavored by the balance of reasons but is morally wrongful in itself, an intrinsic (i.e., consequence-independent) injustice to the person punished. …
Errors In Misdemeanor Adjudication, Samuel R. Gross
Errors In Misdemeanor Adjudication, Samuel R. Gross
Articles
Millions of defendants are convicted of misdemeanors in the United States each year but almost none obtain exonerations, primarily because ordinarily exoneration is far too costly and time consuming to pursue for anything less than years of imprisonment. The National Registry of Exonerations lists all known exonerations in the United States since 1989 — 2,145 cases, as of the end of 2017; only 85 are misdemeanors, 4%. In all but one of these misdemeanor exonerations the defendants were convicted of crimes that never happened; by comparison, more than three-quarters of felony exonerees were convicted of actual crimes that other people …