Law Commons^™

Erasing Evidence Of Historic Injustice: The Cannabis Criminal Records Expungement Paradox, Julie E. Steiner

Faculty Scholarship

Cannabis prohibition and its subsequent enforcement have yielded an epic societal tragedy. The decision to criminalize cannabis was a paradigm-shifting moment in legal history because it converted lawful medicinal or intoxicant seeking conduct into criminal activity, inviting government intrusion into matters previously self-controlled.

Scholars increasingly recognize that prohibition was built upon a decades-long, false, media-driven narrative that “marijuana” was one of society’s worst menacing enemies. Using overtly racist propaganda, the narrative successfully captured the audience, fomenting public anxiety and unfairly demonizing cannabis and its users. This misinformation campaign ultimately led to its current status as prohibited under the federal Controlled …

The Fourth Amendment And Surveillance In A Digital World, Arthur Leavens

Faculty Scholarship

Technology has transformed government surveillance and opened traditionally private information to official scrutiny. The current privacy-based approach to the Fourth Amendment is unable to cope with the changes. This Article offers a solution to the problems that technological surveillance techniques present. Starting with the introduction of the approach in Katz, the Article reviews the development of privacy-based approach. It then looks at three 21st century Supreme Court cases that grappled with applying the Katz test to advanced technological surveillance techniques: Kyllo, Quon, and Jones. These cases demonstrate the problems that the privacy-based approach creates and the …

Book Review: American Jericho: A Book Review Of The Hanging Judge By Michael A. Ponsor, Giovanna Shay

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Hanging Judge By Michael A. Ponsor -- A Book Review: Capital Punishment -- Is The Death Penalty Worth The Price?, Beth D. Cohen, Pat K. Newcombe

Faculty Scholarship

In 2000-2001, Judge Ponsor presided over the first death penalty case in Massachusetts in nearly 50 years, United States v. Gilbert. Gilbert’s trial marked only the third time that a federal capital case had gone to trial in a state without the death penalty. According to Ponsor, he felt a particularly heavy responsibility to ensure that both the government and the defense got a fair trial. In fact, in 2001, after the conclusion of the trial, Ponsor did something somewhat unusual for a judge; he wrote a lengthy editorial about the death penalty. He wrote: “[t]he simple question - not …

The New State Postconviction, Giovanna Shay

Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines two October Term 2011 Supreme Court cases – Maples v. Thomas and Martinez v. Ryan – which have a significant impact on the provision of counsel in state postconviction proceedings. In Maples and Martinez the Court expanded the circumstances in which deficient performance by state postconviction counsel can overcome procedural default, to permit the prisoner to litigate defaulted claims on the merits in federal habeas. The Author argues that, given the increased significance of state postconviction under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), Maples and Martinez could have a salutary effect on the development of …

Defying Gravity: The Development Of Standards In The International Prosecution Of International Atrocity Crimes, Matthew H. Charity

Faculty Scholarship

The International Criminal Court (the “ICC”), now one decade old, is still in the process of setting norms as to scope, jurisdiction, and other issues. One issue that has thus far defied resolution is a key issue of jurisdiction: the place of complementarity in deciding whether certain criminal issues impacting international standards or interests should be decided before the ICC or national tribunals. Although the Rome Statute crystallizes definitions of core international crimes that may be tried before the ICC, the process of determining whether to leave jurisdiction with the nation or allowing jurisdiction to the ICC continues to lack …

Exhausted, Giovanna Shay

Faculty Scholarship

The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) contains an administrative exhaustion provision that was interpreted by the Supreme Court in Woodford v. Ngo in 2006 to impose a procedural default component. This piece argues that we should take seriously Justice Breyer’s Woodford concurrence, in which he noted that administrative law doctrine contains well-established exceptions to exhaustion. Although this point might at first seem inconsistent with other Supreme Court cases interpreting the PLRA, this Article argues that Justice Breyer’s concurrence can be reconciled with those opinions. PLRA exhaustion invokes regular administrative law exhaustion doctrine so long as it is not inconsistent with …