Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (10)
- Southern Methodist University (5)
- Pace University (4)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (4)
- Cornell University Law School (3)
-
- University of Colorado Law School (2)
- American University Washington College of Law (1)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (1)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (1)
- University of Baltimore Law (1)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (1)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (1)
- University of Kentucky (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- University of New Hampshire (1)
- University of Richmond (1)
- Valparaiso University (1)
- Washington University in St. Louis (1)
- William & Mary Law School (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Articles (7)
- All Faculty Scholarship (5)
- Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters (5)
- Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications (4)
- Book Chapters (3)
-
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (3)
- Law Faculty Publications (2)
- Publications (2)
- Scholarly Works (2)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (1)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (1)
- Faculty Publications (1)
- Law Faculty Scholarly Articles (1)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Scholarship@WashULaw (1)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Utah Law Faculty Scholarship (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 41
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Informed Jury, Daniel Epps, William Ortman
The Informed Jury, Daniel Epps, William Ortman
Scholarship@WashULaw
The right to a criminal jury trial is a constitutional disappointment. Cases almost never make it to a jury because of plea bargaining. In the few cases that do, the jury is relegated to a narrow factfinding role that denies it normative voice or the ability to serve as a meaningful check on excessive punishment.
One simple change could situate the jury where it belongs, at the center of the criminal process. The most important thing juries do in criminal cases is authorize state punishment. But today, when a jury returns a guilty verdict, it authorizes punishment without any idea …
Playing By The Rule: How Aba Model Rule 8.4(G) Can Regulate Jury Exclusion, Anna Offit
Playing By The Rule: How Aba Model Rule 8.4(G) Can Regulate Jury Exclusion, Anna Offit
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
Discrimination during voir dire remains a critical impediment to empaneling juries that reflect the diversity of the United States. While various solutions have been proposed, scholars have largely overlooked ethics rules as an instrument for preventing discriminatory behavior during jury selection. Focusing on the ABA Model Rule 8.4(g), which regulates professional misconduct, this article argues that ethics rules can, under certain conditions, offer an effective deterrent to exclusionary practices among legal actors. Part I examines the specific history, evolution, and application of revised ABA Model Rule 8.4(g). Part II delves into the ways that ethics rules in general, despite their …
Jury Nullification: The Current State Of The Law, Louisa Heiny
Jury Nullification: The Current State Of The Law, Louisa Heiny
Utah Law Faculty Scholarship
In 2018, the Utah legislature considered a proposed bill that would have explicitly granted jurors the right to nullify in criminal cases. This research, done in preparation for committee testimony, contains the most up-to-date law on the topic. It includes a fifty-state survey on whether juries in various jurisdictions are (1) given the right to consider the possible sentencing penalty before rendering a verdict; (2) told they may disregard the law; or (3) instructed on the right to nullify. Additionally, the research includes fifty-state survey data on whether judges may lie to juries about the right to nullify, and how …
Prosecuting In The Shadow Of The Jury, Anna Offit
Prosecuting In The Shadow Of The Jury, Anna Offit
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
This article offers an unprecedented empirical window into prosecutorial discretion drawing on long-term participatory research between 2013 and 2017. The central finding is that jurors play a vital role in federal prosecutors’ decision-making, professional identities, and formulations of justice. This is because even the remote possibility of lay scrutiny creates an opening for prosecutors to make common sense assessments of (1) the evidence in their cases, (2) the character of witnesses, defendants and victims, and (3) their own moral and professional character as public servants. By facilitating explicit consideration of the fairness of their cases from a public vantage point, …
Trials By Peers: The Ebb And Flow Of The Criminal Jury In France And Belgium, Claire M. Germain
Trials By Peers: The Ebb And Flow Of The Criminal Jury In France And Belgium, Claire M. Germain
UF Law Faculty Publications
The participation of lay jurors in criminal courts has known much ebb and flow both in France and in Belgium. These two countries belong to the civil law tradition, where juries are the exception rather than the rule in criminal trials, and they only exist in criminal cases, not civil cases. In spite of some similarities, there are substantial differences between the two countries, and their systems will be examined in turn.
In France, the Cour d’assises itself was inherited from the French Revolution. Since a law of 1941, it is a mixed jury system, meaning that lay citizens sit …
The Subversions And Perversions Of Shadow Vigilantism, Paul H. Robinson, Sarah M. Robinson
The Subversions And Perversions Of Shadow Vigilantism, Paul H. Robinson, Sarah M. Robinson
All Faculty Scholarship
This excerpt from the recently published Shadow Vigilantes book argues that, while vigilantism, even moral vigilantism, can be dangerous to a society, the real danger is not of hordes of citizens, frustrated by the system’s doctrines of disillusionment, rising up to take the law into their own hands. Frustration can spark a vigilante impulse, but such classic aggressive vigilantism is not the typical response. More common is the expression of disillusionment in less brazen ways by a more surreptitious undermining and distortion of the operation of the criminal justice system.
Shadow vigilantes, as they might be called, can affect the …
Peer Review: Navigating Uncertainty In The United States Jury System, Anna Offit
Peer Review: Navigating Uncertainty In The United States Jury System, Anna Offit
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
This Article examines American prosecutors’ approaches to uncertainty during voir dire. At different points during trial preparation— and during jury selection itself—lawyers draw on multiple interpretive systems to make sense of ordinary citizens. Taking Assistant United States Attorneys in a federal jurisdiction in the Northeast United States as a case study, and drawing on ethnographic research, I focus on three systems prosecutors alternately (and sometimes simultaneously) use to evaluate jurors: (1) probabilistic and evaluative analogies, (2) juror-types generated from the details of criminal cases, and (3) local knowledge stemming from prosecutors’ relationships and experiences outside of the courtroom. I show …
Lights Hidden Under Bushel's Case, Thomas A. Green
Lights Hidden Under Bushel's Case, Thomas A. Green
Book Chapters
Some forty years ago, Charlie Donahue created a course which he titled "Law, Morals and Society." Designed for undergraduates, and situated among the offerings of the University of Michigan's interdisciplinary Medieval and Renaissance Collegium, the course reflected the approach to doing history that, as this volume recognizes, Charlie has followed throughout his long and enormously influential career as scholar, teacher, lecturer, and inepressible master of well-timed interventions during conference-panel discussion periods. "LMS" was composed of four units. Charlie, who taught two of them, led off with the legal basis for the deposition of Richard II; I followed with the law …
The Jury And Criminal Responsibility In Anglo-American History, Thomas A. Green
The Jury And Criminal Responsibility In Anglo-American History, Thomas A. Green
Articles
Anglo-American theories of criminal responsibility require scholars to grapple with, inter alia, the relationship between the formal rule of law and the powers of the lay jury as well as two inherent ideas of freedom: freedom of the will and political liberty. Here, by way of canvassing my past work and prefiguring future work, I sketch some elements of the history of the Anglo-American jury and offer some glimpses of commentary on the interplay between the jury—particularly its application of conventional morality to criminal judgments—and the formal rule of law of the state. My central intent is to pose questions …
Juries And The Criminal Constitution, Meghan J. Ryan
Juries And The Criminal Constitution, Meghan J. Ryan
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
Judges are regularly deciding criminal constitutional issues based on changing societal values. For example, they are determining whether police officer conduct has violated society’s "reasonable expectations of privacy" under the Fourth Amendment and whether a criminal punishment fails to comport with the "evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society" under the Eighth Amendment. Yet judges are not trained to assess societal values, nor do they, in assessing them, ordinarily consult data to determine what those values are. Instead, judges turn inward, to their own intuitions, morals, and values, to determine these matters. But judges’ internal …
Constitutionally Tailoring Punishment, Richard A. Bierschbach, Stephanos Bibas
Constitutionally Tailoring Punishment, Richard A. Bierschbach, Stephanos Bibas
All Faculty Scholarship
Since the turn of the century, the Supreme Court has begun to regulate non-capital sentencing under the Sixth Amendment in the Apprendi line of cases (requiring jury findings of fact to justify sentence enhancements) as well as under the Eighth Amendment in the Miller and Graham line of cases (forbidding mandatory life imprisonment for juvenile defendants). Though both lines of authority sound in individual rights, in fact they are fundamentally about the structures of criminal justice. These two seemingly disparate lines of doctrine respond to structural imbalances in non-capital sentencing by promoting morally appropriate punishment judgments that are based on …
"Bad Juror" Lists And The Prosecutor's Duty To Disclose, Ira Robbins
"Bad Juror" Lists And The Prosecutor's Duty To Disclose, Ira Robbins
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
Prosecutors sometimes use what are known as "bad juror" lists to exclude particular citizens from jury service. Not only does this practice interfere with an open and fair jury-selection process, thus implicating a defendant's right to be tried by a jury of his or her peers, but it also violates potential jurors' rights to serve in this important capacity. But who is on these lists? And is a prosecutor required to disclose the lists to defense counsel? These questions have largely gone unnoticed by legal analysts. This Article addresses the prosecutor's duty to disclose bad-juror lists. It reviews the federal …
The Missing Jury: The Neglected Role Of Juries In Eighth Amendment Punishments Clause Determinations, Meghan J. Ryan
The Missing Jury: The Neglected Role Of Juries In Eighth Amendment Punishments Clause Determinations, Meghan J. Ryan
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
A recent study of death penalty cases has revealed that judges, who are ordinarily thought of as the guardians of criminal defendants’ constitutional rights, are more likely to impose harsher punishments than jurors. This may be unsettling in its own right, but it is especially concerning because judges are the individuals charged with determining whether punishments are unconstitutionally cruel and unusual under the Eighth Amendment, and these determinations are supposed to be based on “the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.” The study suggests that judges are out of step with society’s moral norms, …
She Blinded Me With Science: Wrongful Convictions And The "Reverse Csi-Effect", Mark A. Godsey, Marie Alou
She Blinded Me With Science: Wrongful Convictions And The "Reverse Csi-Effect", Mark A. Godsey, Marie Alou
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
Prosecutors in the United States are often heard to complain these days of the "CSI-effect."' When they make this complaint, they mean that the popularity of television shows like CSI has made it unduly difficult for them to obtain convictions of guilty defendants. Jurors today have become spoiled as a result of the proliferation of these "high-tech" forensic shows, and now unrealistically expect conclusive scientific proof of guilt before they will convict. The unfortunate result is that guilty defendants are acquitted because of a lack of forensic evidence in cases where, in reality, no such forensic evidence was possible or …
Modeling The Effects Of Peremptory Challenges On Jury Selection And Jury Verdicts, Roger Allen Ford
Modeling The Effects Of Peremptory Challenges On Jury Selection And Jury Verdicts, Roger Allen Ford
Law Faculty Scholarship
Although proponents argue that peremptory challenges make juries more impartial by eliminating “extreme” jurors, studies testing this theory are rare and inconclusive. For this article, two formal models of jury selection are constructed, and various selection procedures are tested, assuming that attorneys act rationally rather than discriminate based on animus. The models demonstrate that even when used rationally, peremptory challenges can distort jury decision making and undermine verdict reliability. Peremptory challenges systematically shift jurors toward the majority view of the population by favoring median jurors over extreme jurors. If the population of potential jurors is skewed in favor of conviction …
Performing Discretion Or Performing Discrimination: An Analysis Of Race And Ritual In Batson Decisions In Capital Jury Selection, Melynda J. Price
Performing Discretion Or Performing Discrimination: An Analysis Of Race And Ritual In Batson Decisions In Capital Jury Selection, Melynda J. Price
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
Research shows the mere presence of Blacks on capital juries--on the rare occasions they are seated--can mean the difference between life and death. Peremptory challenges are the primary method to remove these pivotal participants. Batson v. Kentucky developed hearings as an immediate remedy for the unconstitutional removal of jurors through racially motivated peremptory challenges. These proceedings have become rituals that sanction continued bias in the jury selection process and ultimately affect the outcome of capital trials. This Article deconstructs the role of the Batson ritual in legitimating the removal of African American jurors. These perfunctory hearings fail to meaningfully interrogate …
Taking A Stand On Taking The Stand: The Effect Of A Prior Criminal Record On The Decision To Testify And On Trial Outcomes, Theodore Eisenberg, Valerie P. Hans
Taking A Stand On Taking The Stand: The Effect Of A Prior Criminal Record On The Decision To Testify And On Trial Outcomes, Theodore Eisenberg, Valerie P. Hans
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
This article uses unique data from over 300 criminal trials in four large counties to study the relations between the existence of a prior criminal record and defendants testifying at trial, between testifying at trial and juries' learning about a criminal record, and between juries' learning about a criminal record and their decisions to convict or acquit. Sixty percent of defendants without criminal records testified compared to 45 percent with criminal records. For testifying defendants with criminal records, juries learned of those records in about half the cases. Juries rarely learned about criminal records unless defendants testified. After controlling for …
The Framers' Search Power: The Misunderstood Statutory History Of Suspicion & Probable Cause, Fabio Arcila, Jr.
The Framers' Search Power: The Misunderstood Statutory History Of Suspicion & Probable Cause, Fabio Arcila, Jr.
Scholarly Works
Originalist analyses of the Framers’ views about governmental search power have devoted insufficient attention to the civil search statutes they promulgated for regulatory purposes. What attention has been paid concludes that the Framers were divided about how accessible search remedies should be. This Article explains why this conventional account is mostly wrong and explores the lessons to be learned from the statutory choices the Framers made with regard to search and seizure law. In enacting civil search statutes, the Framers chose to depart from common law standards and instead largely followed the patterns of preceding British civil search statutes. The …
Judicial Fact-Finding At Sentencing, Stephanos Bibas
Judicial Fact-Finding At Sentencing, Stephanos Bibas
All Faculty Scholarship
This encyclopedia entry summarizes the pendulum-swings that led the Supreme Court in Apprendi v. New Jersey, Blakely v. Washington, and United States v. Booker to limit judges' ability to find facts at sentencing. Paradoxically, the much-criticized Federal Sentencing Guidelines have survived; a line of cases that began as an effort to restore juries' role has turned into a guarantor of judicial discretion; and the doctrine has quickly moved far from its Sixth Amendment roots to a policy balancing test. The Court could instead have pursued a different, more fruitful path. The Court did not have to force sentencing factors into …
Rita V. United States Leaves More Open Than It Answers, Stephanos Bibas
Rita V. United States Leaves More Open Than It Answers, Stephanos Bibas
All Faculty Scholarship
This essay surveys the sentencing issues left open by Rita v. United States and considers how the presumption of reasonableness is likely to operate in practice and how rebutable it is, the roles of safe harbors and individual judges' policy disagreements, and the importance of Justices Stevens and Ginsburg as the swing Justices in this area. This line of cases has drifted far from its roots in a Sixth Amendment concern for juries. Though the resulting sentencing policies may be substantively desirable, the Court cannot articulate how they are rooted in the Sixth Amendment's concern for juries.
The Twenty-First Century Jury: Worst Of Times Or Best Of Times?, Valerie P. Hans
The Twenty-First Century Jury: Worst Of Times Or Best Of Times?, Valerie P. Hans
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
In thinking about legal developments, new research findings, and the continuing swirl of controversy over this venerable American institution, I observe the same paradoxical condition that Charles Dickens found in 18th Century London: "It was the best of times; it was the worst of times." There is evidence of both the expansion of jury trial rights, yet contraction of jury trials. Research evidence indicates that juries perform well, yet the 21st Century jury confronts more complex decision making tasks and continuing doubts about its fairness and competence.
Improving Criminal Jury Decision Making After The Blakely Revolution, J. J. Prescott, Sonja B. Starr
Improving Criminal Jury Decision Making After The Blakely Revolution, J. J. Prescott, Sonja B. Starr
Articles
The shift in sentencing fact-finding responsibility triggered in many states by Blakely v. Washington may dramatically change the complexity and type of questions that juries will be required to answer. Among the most important challenges confronting legislatures now debating the future of their sentencing regimes is whether juries are prepared to handle this new responsibility effectively - and, if not, what can be done about it. Yet neither scholars addressing the impact of Blakely nor advocates of jury reform have seriously explored these questions. Nonetheless, a number of limitations on juror decision making seriously threaten the accuracy of verdicts in …
Judge-Jury Agreement In Criminal Cases: A Partial Replication Of Kalven And Zeisel's The American Jury, Theodore Eisenberg, Paula L. Hannaford-Agor, Valerie P. Hans, Nicole L. Waters, G. Thomas Munsterman, Stewart J. Schwab, Martin T. Wells
Judge-Jury Agreement In Criminal Cases: A Partial Replication Of Kalven And Zeisel's The American Jury, Theodore Eisenberg, Paula L. Hannaford-Agor, Valerie P. Hans, Nicole L. Waters, G. Thomas Munsterman, Stewart J. Schwab, Martin T. Wells
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
This study uses a new criminal case data set to partially replicate Kalven and Zeisel's classic study of judge-jury agreement. The data show essentially the same rate of judge-jury agreement as did Kalven and Zeisel for cases tried almost 50 years ago. This study also explores judge-jury agreement as a function of evidentiary strength (as reported by both judges and juries), evidentiary complexity (as reported by both judges and juries), legal complexity (as reported by judges), and locale. Regardless of which adjudicator's view of evidentiary strength is used, judges tend to convict more than juries in cases of "middle" evidentiary …
Contaminating The Verdict: The Problem Of Juror Misconduct, Bennett L. Gershman
Contaminating The Verdict: The Problem Of Juror Misconduct, Bennett L. Gershman
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This article describes the myriad ways in which misconduct by jurors can contaminate a trial and verdict and the ability of courts to remedy such misconduct. Part II examines the case law in which criminal defendants have challenged their convictions on the basis of juror misconduct. Defendants have claimed that jurors were influenced by external contacts with third parties, exposed to extraneous, non-evidentiary information, engaged in contrived experiments and improper reenactments in the jury room, made dishonest and misleading statements during jury selection, engaged in conduct demonstrating bias and prejudgment, suffered from physical and mental impairments, engaged in pre-deliberation discussions …
How Juries Get It Wrong - Anatomy Of The Detroit Terror Case, Bennett L. Gershman
How Juries Get It Wrong - Anatomy Of The Detroit Terror Case, Bennett L. Gershman
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Article describes the background and trial of the four defendants in the so-called Detroit “Sleeper Cell” terrorist prosecution. It examines the evidence relied on by the jury to reach its verdict, particularly the testimony of a key turncoat witness who accused the defendants of participation in a terrorist conspiracy. Part III examines how the jury's search for truth was corrupted by false, misleading, and incomplete proof. It identifies several extrinsic sources of jury error including suppressed evidence, dishonest and unreliable testimony, partisan experts, coaching, obstructed cross-examination, and inflammatory arguments. Finally, with the Detroit terrorist trial as the model, Part …
The Dilution Effect: Federalization, Fair Cross-Sections, And The Concept Of Community, Laura Gaston Dooley
The Dilution Effect: Federalization, Fair Cross-Sections, And The Concept Of Community, Laura Gaston Dooley
Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Correcting Deadly Confusion: Responding To Jury Inquiries In Capital Cases, Stephen P. Garvey, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Paul Marcus
Correcting Deadly Confusion: Responding To Jury Inquiries In Capital Cases, Stephen P. Garvey, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Paul Marcus
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Reasonable Certainty And Reasonable Doubt, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.
Reasonable Certainty And Reasonable Doubt, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.
Law Faculty Publications
Ultimately, this article is about how well different definitions of reasonable doubt fit society's goals for the criminal justice system. To be clear, this article is not about which definition is best. That question is far broader than the one I seek to explore. Determining what definition of reasonable doubt is best for the system is a question for another time. Rather, this article describes a few different ways that reasonable doubt and the presumption of innocence can be interpreted and considers the implications of applying those differing interpretations. Part II of this article examines how the criminal justice system …
Race, Angst And Capital Punishment: The Burger Court's Existential Struggle, Katherine R. Kruse
Race, Angst And Capital Punishment: The Burger Court's Existential Struggle, Katherine R. Kruse
Scholarly Works
This article chronicles the Burger Court's inability to fashion a suitable remedy for racism in the discretionary system of capital sentencing. The article discusses the Court's initial response, “remedial paralysis,” which is evident, not only in McGautha v. California, where the Court refused to find that the Due Process Clause was violated by standardless death sentencing, but also in Furman v. Georgia, where the Court decided to abolish the death penalty. The article further explores the Court's reinstatement of the death penalty, and two of the Court's forays into “bad faith” denial that sustained the death penalty, particularly the Court's …
Thoughts From Across The Water On Hearsay And Confrontation, Richard D. Friedman
Thoughts From Across The Water On Hearsay And Confrontation, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
This article draws on the history of the hearsay rule, and on recent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, to argue that the right to confrontation should be recognised as a basic principle of the law of evidence, and that aspects of the Law Commission's proposals for reform of the hearsay rule, and of the Home Office's proposals for restrictions on the right of cross-examination, are therefore unsatisfactory.