Law Commons^™

Conversations On The Warren Court's Impact On Criminal Justice: In Re Gault At 50, Cara H. Drinan

Scholarly Articles

This Article examines the Supreme Court’s landmark In re Gault decision of 1967, in which the Supreme Court ushered in the “due process era” of juvenile justice in America by determining that juveniles were entitled to the right to counsel and other procedural safeguards during delinquency proceedings. But this Article continues with a critical focus on the impact of the decision today, examining a dichotomy between what was declared a “revolution in children’s rights,” and how youth in the criminal justice system still have not seen the extent of constitutional protections declared necessary by Gault. Arguing that Gault …

The Role And Experience Of Law Students And Law Schools In Clemency Project 2014, J.P. "Sandy" Ogilvy

Scholarly Articles

The response of lawyers to the call to volunteer with Clemency Project 2014 was phenomenal. More than 3000 individuals from over 800 law firms, law schools, and organizations reviewed more than 36,000 applications from federal prisoners who requested pro bono assistance in filing an application for commutation of sentence with the President. By the end of the Obama administration 2581 petitions were filed or supported by Clemency Project 2014. Of those, 894 applicants were granted commutations by President Obama.

This article looks at the response of the law schools and law students to the call for volunteers. The numbers are …

Misconstruing Graham & Miller, Cara H. Drinan

Scholarly Articles

In the last three years the Supreme Court has decreed a sea change in its juvenile Eighth Amendment jurisprudence. In particular, in its Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama rulings, the Court struck down a majority of the states’ juvenile sentencing laws, outlawing life without parole for juveniles who commit non-homicide offenses and mandating individualized sentencing for those children who commit even the most serious crimes. An examination of state laws and sentencing practices, however, suggests that the Graham and Miller rulings have fallen on deaf ears. After briefly describing what these two decisions required of the states, in …

Where Pardons Are Concerned, Second Best May Not Be So Bad After All: A Response To Chad Flanders, Cara H. Drinan

Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Getting Real About Gideon: The Next Fifty Years Of Enforcing The Right To Counsel, Cara H. Drinan

Scholarly Articles

As we mark the fiftieth anniversary of Gideon, in this Article I argue that we can and should be more realistic in our efforts to enforce the right to counsel. Assuming, as many now do, that five decades of resource-starved indigent defense will likely continue in the future, where are our efforts most effectively deployed in the years to come? I address that question in three parts. Part II briefly acknowledges the entrenched crisis in indigent defense that is as old as the Gideon decision itself. Part III examines the most salient reform efforts of the last fifty years, highlighting …

Searching Cell Phones After Arrest: Exceptions To The Warrant And Probable Cause Requirements, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

Police officers lawfully arrest a suspect, search him, and seize his cell phone. Sometime later, without first getting a search warrant, an officer answers an incoming call, reads an incoming text, or examines the phone’s memory, call log, prior text messages, photographs, or Internet access records. As a result, the police acquire information that leads to additional evidence concerning the arrest crime, or a totally different and unrelated crime. Prior to trial, the defendant moves to suppress the evidence. The prosecutor argues that the officer’s action was justified by exigent circumstances, constituted a lawful search incident to the arrest, or …

Katz On A Hot Tin Roof: Saving The Fourth Amendment From Commercial Conditioning By Reviving Voluntariness In Disclosures To Third Parties, Mary Graw Leary

Scholarly Articles

In a world in which Americans are tracked on the Internet, tracked through their cell phones, tracked through the apps they purchase, and monitored by hundreds of traffic cameras, privacy is quickly becoming nothing more than a quaint vestige of the past.

In a previous article discussing the intersection of technology and the Fourth Amendment, I proposed reframing the issue away from conventional commentary. The Missed Opportunity of United States v. Jones: Commercial Erosion of Fourth Amendment Protection in a Post-Google Earth World, 15 PENN. J. CON. L. 331, 333 (2012). That article posits that society has reached the point …

The Missed Opportunity Of United States V. Jones: Commercial Erosion Of Fourth Amendment Protection In A Post Google Earth World, Mary Graw Leary

Scholarly Articles

The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. These protections, therefore, are only triggered when the government engages is a “search” or “seizure.” For decades, the Court defined “search” as a government examination of an area where one has a “reasonable expectation of privacy.” Such an expectation requires both that the individual demonstrate a subjective expectation of privacy and that the expectation is one society finds reasonable. In 1974, Anthony Amsterdam prophesized the unworkability of this test, warning of a day that the government would circumvent it my merely announcing 24 hour surveillance. Similarly, the …

Graham On The Ground, Cara H. Drinan

Scholarly Articles

In Graham v. Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional to sentence a non-homicide juvenile offender to life in prison without parole. While states need not guarantee release to these juvenile offenders, they cannot foreclose such an outcome at the sentencing phase. Scholars have identified several long-term ramifications of Graham, including its likely influence on juvenile sentencing practices and on retributive justice theory. As yet unexamined, though, are the important and thorny legal questions that Graham raises for state judges and lawmakers in the very short term. To whom does the Graham decision apply? What is the …

Clemency In A Time Of Crisis, Cara H. Drinan

Scholarly Articles

At the state level, the power to pardon or commute a criminal sentence — that is, to grant clemency — is vested in either the Governor, an executive clemency board, or some combination thereof. Until very recently, clemency grants were a consistent feature of our criminal justice system. In the last four decades, though, state clemency grants have declined significantly; in some states, clemency seems to have disappeared altogether. In this Article, I contend that executive clemency should be revived at the state level in response to ongoing systemic criminal justice failings. Part I of this Article describes clemency at …

Lafler And Frye: Good News For Public Defense Litigation, Cara H. Drinan

Scholarly Articles

In Missouri v. Frye and Lafler v. Cooper, the Supreme Court confirmed that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel applies to the plea negotiation process and held that prejudicial error can flow from ineffective plea advice. The defense community has applauded these decisions for recognizing the pivotal role that guilty pleas play in our criminal justice system and for requiring a minimum level of efficacy in plea lawyering. In this brief essay, I suggest that Frye and Lafler are victories for the defense community in yet another way. The decisions reflect judicial realism, and in this respect, they are especially …

Electronic Privacy In The Government Workplace And The City Of Ontario, California V. Quon: The Supreme Court Brought Forth A Mouse, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

This Article begins with a very brief overview of fundamental Fourth Amendment principles and federal statutory regulation of electronic surveillance of communications. Part II consists of a detailed look at O'Connor v. Ortega, and the uncertainties the decision created in the law. Part III examines City of Ontario v. Quon, and analyzes what the Court did decide. Part IV examines the issues in Quon that the Court did not decide. Part V states my conclusions as to where the decision leaves the law. The Article ends with an "user's guide" to Quon, which outlines how litigants and judges should …

Systemic Indigent Defense Litigation: A 2010 Update, Cara H. Drinan

Scholarly Articles

Part I of this Essay describes the systemic indigent defense suits in Michigan and New York, noting their similar but ultimately divergent paths. Part II addresses the question of how systemic litigation in the indigent defense arena is faring in the wake of the Michigan suit. Despite the Michigan setback, this kind of litigation may still be a powerful reform tool in certain jurisdictions. Moreover, in some jurisdictions there will always be the need for litigation simply because it is the only path to reform. I note three jurisdictions where litigation is either already happening in some fashion and/or where …

The Child Declarant, The Confrontation Clause, And The Forfeiture Doctrine, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment normally precludes the state from offering a child's "testimonial" hearsay statements into evidence if the child does not testify. An exception to that rule arises, however, if the defendant has engaged in misconduct that results in the forfeiture of the right to confront the child in court. In Giles v California, the United States Supreme Court attempted to clarify what a prosecutor must show in order to invoke the forfeiture doctrine. This Article examines the effect of Giles on the "testimonial" statement of a child declarant who does not testify at the defendant's …

The Third Generation Of Indigent Defense Litigation, Cara H. Drinan

Scholarly Articles

For years, scholars have documented the national crisis in indigent defense and its many tragic implications, and yet the crisis persists. Traditionally, the appellate and political processes were the exclusive avenues for indigent defense reform, and each suffered from critical infirmities. By the 1970's, individuals and groups began to seek prospective judicial reform of indigent defense systems. Widely used in other arenas, systemic suits based on the Sixth Amendment have been few in number and, at least in their early form, relatively unsuccessful. Other scholars have provided a descriptive account of structural litigation to improve indigent defense, and this article …

Confrontation, Forfeiture, And Giles V. California: An Interim User’S Guide, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

This Article examines the implications of Giles v. California. It begins in Part II by examining the Confrontation Clause before Giles, and explains how Crawford v. Washington upended the Clause's prior interpretation in Ohio v. Roberts, by excluding all "testimonial" statements, however "trustworthy" a court might consider them to be. It then provides a brief explanation of the forfeiture doctrine and its endorsement in Crawford. Part III consists of a detailed examination and critique of the Court's resolution of the central issue in Giles: that the forfeiture doctrine applies only when the prosecution can show that the defendant killed …

How To Analyze The Accuracy Of Eyewitness Testimony In A Criminal Case, Richard A. Wise, Clifford S. Fishman, Martin A. Safer

Scholarly Articles

This Article describes a method for analyzing the accuracy of eyewitness testimony that will significantly enhance the ability of the criminal justice system to assess eyewitness accuracy. The method consists of the following components: First, ascertain whether law enforcement conducted the eyewitness interviews in a manner that obtained the maximum amount of information from the eyewitness, did not contaminate the eyewitness's memory of the crime, or artificially increase the eyewitness's confidence. Next, determine whether the identification procedures in the case were fair and unbiased. Finally, evaluate what eyewitness factors during the crime are likely to have increased or decreased the …

The Revitalization Of Ake: A Capital Defendant’S Right To Expert Assistance, Cara H. Drinan

Scholarly Articles

Under Ake v. Oklahoma, indigent capital defendants are entitled to a wide array of expert assistance at both the conviction and sentencing phases of trial. Historically, the Ake entitlement has been under-utilized for both structural and normative reasons. However, today Ake is in the process of being revitalized. Recent Supreme Court decisions and the revised American Bar Association (ABA) Guidelines for the Appointment and Performance of Defense Counsel in Death Penalty Cases offer the hope that the theoretical entitlement of Ake will be fully realized. Moreover, if that occurs, one of two outcomes is likely to ensue at the state …

Defense Access To A Prosecution Witness’S Psychotherapy Or Counseling Records, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Crawford V. Washington: The Supreme Court Opts For A New (Old?) Approach To The Confrontation Clause, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Informant Credibility And Evidence Of Cooperation In Other Cases, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

The prosecutor calls an informant as a witness. Her carefully prepared questions elicit in damning detail how-according to the informant-the defendant eagerly participated in the crimes charged in the indictment. On cross, defense counsel goes into full attack mode, covering the informant's prior convictions, his other unsavory and untruthful acts, and the informant's sordid reasons for cooperating with the police-money, a break on his own case, or both. To rehabilitate the informant, the prosecutor wants to elicit testimony from police officers about the many cases the informant has helped them make and how truthful he has always been in the …

Police Trespass And The Fourth Amendment: A Wall In Need Of Mending, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

Part I of this article provides an overview of basic Fourth Amendment principles. Part II analyzes the Oliver and Ciraolo cases which define and distinguish residential "curtilage," protected by the Fourth Amendment, and "open fields," which the Fourth Amendment does not protect. Part III reviews the Dow decision's discussion of whether an industrial facility, like a residence, might have constitutionally protected curtilage. Part IV focuses on the Dunn decision, which dramatizes the curtilage-open field dichotomy while at the same time blurring the line between the two. Finally, part V shows how these decisions may have invalidated the "commercial curtilage" concept …

Expansion Of Arrest Power: A Key To Effective Intervention, Lisa G. Lerman

Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Title 28, Section 2255 Of The United States Code: Motion To Vacate, Set Aside Or Correct Sentence: Effective Or Ineffective Aid To A Federal Prisoner?, George P. Smith Ii

Scholarly Articles

This article places in historical perspective the enactment and administration by the federal courts of Section 2255 of the Judicial Code and concludes a prisoner’s basic right to attack, collaterally, a conviction is largely unimpaired by this legislation. Section 2255 was enacted not with the idea of enlarging the class of remedies already available to attack a conviction, but rather to provide that a proper attack upon an original conviction be made in the sentencing court and not in some other court through use of the writ of habeas corpus. Resort to habeas corpus is thus allowed only when the …