Law Commons^™

Innocence, Privacy, And Targeting In Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Sherry F. Colb

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

"As The Gentle Rain From Heaven": Mercy In Capital Sentencing, Stephen P. Garvey

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Our constitutional law of capital sentencing does not understand Shakespeare's "gentle rain from heaven." Mercy confuses and befuddles it. The jury that sentenced Albert Brown to death was instructed that "'mere ... sympathy"' should not play on its judgment. Brown claimed this instruction violated his Eighth Amendment rights, but the Supreme Court disagreed. Some five years later, Justice Scalia dissented when the Court reversed Derrick Morgan's death sentence. According to Justice Scalia, the Court had held that no "merciless" juror could sit in judgment of a capital defendant. The Constitution, he thought, demanded no such thing. These dissents, one embracing …

The Color Of Truth: Race And The Assessment Of Credibility, Sheri Lynn Johnson

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Probation Officers Look At Plea Bargaining, And Do Not Like What They See, David Yellen

Articles

The Probation Officers Advisory Group's survey provides valuable insights into plea bargaining practices under the federal guidelines. Probation officers play a crucial role in guideline sentencing, and their views on the plea bargaining process are significant both because of their proximity to that process and the influence they wield with judges. The survey responses thus deserve attention and may spark lively debate within the Sentencing Commission and elsewhere. Depending on one's perspective, the picture that emerges is of plea bargaining either as a safety valve to mitigate the harshness and rigidity of the guidelines, or an unregulated process that threatens …

Resistance To Equality, Elizabeth M. Schneider

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Jury Responsibility In Capital Sentencing: An Empirical Study, Theodore Eisenberg, Stephen P. Garvey, Martin T. Wells

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The law allows executioners to deny responsibility for what they have done by making it possible for them to believe they have not done it. The law treats members of capital sentencing juries quite differently. It seeks to ensure that they feel responsible for sentencing a defendant to death. This differential treatment rests on a presumed link between a capital sentencer's willingness to accept responsibility for the sentence she imposes and the accuracy and reliability of that sentence. Using interviews of 153 jurors who sat in South Carolina capital cases, this article examines empirically whether capital sentencing jurors assume responsibility …

To Tell The Truth: The Problem Of Prosecutorial "Manipulation" Of Sentencing Facts, Frank O. Bowman Iii

Faculty Publications

Frank O. Bowman, III*In January of this year, Francesca Bowman, Chair of Probation Officers Advisory Group, sent a letter to Judge Richard P. Conaboy, Chairman of the Sentencing Commission, summarizing the results of a survey sent to probation officers in eighty-five districts. It expresses the concern that, in the view of some probation officers, the government usually” is cooperative in supplying information to probation officers preparing presentence investigation reports, but that there appear to be exceptions when the government wants to protect a plea agreement.”

A Bludgeon By Any Other Name: The Misuse Of Ethical Rules Against Prosecutors To Control The Law Of The State, Frank O. Bowman Iii

Faculty Publications

My objective here is threefold: (1) to explain these ethical rules and demonstrate how each is in conflict with longstanding principles of federal criminal law; (2) to explain why these rules are illegitimate, both as rules of ethics and as rules of positive law; and (3) to offer some observations on how the dispute over these rules can sharpen our thinking about the nature and proper limits of ethical rules governing lawyers.

Consistently Inconsistent: The Supreme Court And The Confusion Surrounding Proportionality In Non-Capital Sentencing, Steven P. Grossman

All Faculty Scholarship

(Adapted by permission from 84 Ky. L. J. 107 (1995)) This article examines the Supreme Court's treatment of the Eighth Amendment with respect to claims of excessiveness regarding prison sentences. Specifically, it addresses the issue of whether and to what degree the Eighth Amendment requires that a punishment not be disproportional to the crime punished. In analyzing all of the modern holdings of the Court in this area, one finds significant fault with each. The result of this series of flawed opinions from the Supreme Court is that the state of the law with respect to proportionality in sentencing is …

Who Should Regulate The Ethics Of Federal Prosecutors?, Rory K. Little

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Decade Of International Legal Reform Regarding Child Abuse Investigation And Litigation: Steps Toward A Child Witness Code, John E.B. Myers

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

An Introduction To Federal Habeas Corpus Practice And Procedure, John H. Blume, David P. Voisin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

For many prisoners, federal habeas corpus stands as the last opportunity to challenge the constitutionality of their convictions or sentences. Simply navigating through the procedural maze of habeas practice, however, is a formidable task for inmates proceeding pro se and prisoners represented by counsel. Tragically, those who have had a fundamentally unfair trial, and even those who are innocent, may easily stumble. Since 1867, habeas corpus, or the Great Writ, has been available to state prisoners "in all cases where any person may be restrained of his or her liberty in violation of the constitution, or of any treaty or …

Rape, Race, And Representation: The Power Of Discourse, Discourses Of Power, And The Reconstruction Of Heterosexuality, Elizabeth M. Iglesias

Articles

No abstract provided.

Quality Of Mercy Must Be Restrained, And Other Lessons In Learning To Love The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Frank O. Bowman Iii

Faculty Publications

In the remarks that follow, I do four things. First, for those unfamiliar with the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, I begin by explaining briefly how the Guidelines work. Second, I endeavor to show why Judge Cabranes is wrong, absolutely wrong in declaring the Guidelines a failure, and mostly wrong in the specific criticisms he and others level against the Guidelines. Third, after jousting with Judge Cabranes a bit, I discuss some problems with the current federal sentencing system, most notably the sheer length of narcotics sentences. Finally, I comment briefly on some of the implications of the Guidelines, and the principles …

Three Strikes, You're Out: Two Years Later, Department Of Corrections

California Agencies

No abstract provided.

The Conundrum Of Corporate Liability: Seeking A Consistent Approach To The Constitutional Rights Of Corporations In Criminal Prosecutions, Peter J. Henning

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Shaking The Foundation Of Gideon: A Critique Of Nichols In Overruling Baldasar V. Illinois, 25 Hofstra L. Rev. 507 (1996), Ralph Ruebner, Jennifer Berner, Anne Herbert

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Instructing Illinois Juries On The Definition Of “Reasonable Doubt”: The Need For Reform, 27 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 921 (1996), Timothy P. O'Neill

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Making Criminal Codes Functional: A Code Of Conduct And A Code Of Adjudication, Paul H. Robinson, Peter D. Greene, Natasha R. Goldstein

All Faculty Scholarship

A traditional criminal code performs several functions. It announces the law's commands to those whose conduct it seeks to influence. It also defines the rules to be used in deciding whether a breach of the law's commands will result in criminal liability and, if so, the grade or degree of liability. In serving the first function, the code addresses all members of the public. In performing the second function, it addresses lawyers, judges, jurors, and others who play a role in the adjudication process. In part because of these different audiences, the two functions call for different kinds of documents. …

Specific Agreements About Race: A Response To Professor Sunstein, Sheri Johnson

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Self-Defense As A Rational Excuse, Claire Oakes Finkelstein

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Reform Of The Procuracy And Bar In Russia, Stephen C. Thaman

All Faculty Scholarship

This article discusses recent efforts to reform the Russian bar and procuracy, the institutions’ responses, and the problem of criminal procedure reform as it relates to them.

Having It Both Ways: Proof That The U.S. Supreme Court Is "Unfairly" Prosecution-Oriented, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

If the assertions that this essay makes about the Court's "unfair" prosecution-orientation withstand scrutiny," two further conclusions might follow. First, the highest court in the country is so fixated on ensuring that a particular side wins that it is willing with some frequency to sacrifice the most basic attribute of any court worthy of the name-the appearance of fairness. This conclusion is a much more fundamental challenge to the Court's integrity than is the simple acknowledgement that a majority of the Justices are biased in favor of the government. Second, to the extent the Court's unfairness becomes common knowledge, its …

Introduction: O.J. Simpson And The Criminal Justice System On Trial, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Punishment And Procedure: A Different View Of The American Criminal Justice System, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.

Fact-Bargaining: An American Phenomenon, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.

That's My Story And I'M Stickin' To It: The Jury As Fifth Business In The Trial Of O.J. Simpson And Other Matters, Marianne Wesson

Publications

No abstract provided.

Mature Adjudication: Interpretive Choice In Recent Death Penalty Cases, Bernard Harcourt

Faculty Scholarship

Capital punishment presents a "hard" case for adjudication. It provokes sharp conflict between competing constitutional interpretations and invariably raises questions of judicial bias. This is particularly true in the new Republic of South Africa, where the framers of the interim constitution deliberately were silent regarding the legality of the death penalty. The tension is of equivalent force in the United States, where recent expressions of core constitutional rights have raised potentially irreconcilable conflicts in the application of capital punishment.

Two recent death penalty decisions – the South African Constitutional Court opinions in State v. Makwanyane and the United States Supreme …

The Intertwined Problems Of Immigration And Sentencing, Aaron J. Rappaport, Nora Demleitner, Daniel J. Freed

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Right To Self-Defense Once The Security Council Takes Action, Malvina Halberstam

Articles

No abstract provided.