Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
What Gideon Did, Sara Mayeux
What Gideon Did, Sara Mayeux
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Many accounts of Gideon v Wainwright s legacy focus on what Gideon did not do--its doctrinal and practical limits. For constitutional theorists, Gideon imposed a preexisting national consensus upon a few "outlier" states, and therefore did not represent a dramatic doctrinal shift. For criminal procedure scholars, advocates, and journalists, Gideon has failed, in practice, to guarantee meaningful legal help for poor people charged with crimes. Drawing on original historical research, this Article instead chronicles what Gideon did-the doctrinal and institutional changes it inspired between 1963 and the early 1970s. Gideon shifted the legal profession's policy consensus on indigent defense away …
Teaching A Course On Regulation Of The Police (With A Special Focus On The Sixth Amendment), Christopher Slobogin
Teaching A Course On Regulation Of The Police (With A Special Focus On The Sixth Amendment), Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
The organizers of this symposium gave us the choice of writing about effective assistance of counsel or about teaching criminal procedure. I've decided to do both. This article discusses teaching the criminal procedure course most often called "Police Practices," for which I write a textbook entitled Regulation of Police Investigation: Legal, Historical, Empirical and Comparative Materials.' Borrowing heavily from the Teacher's Manual for that book, the first part of this article describes my general philosophy for teaching the course. The rest of the article illustrates this philosophy by describing how I teach students about the application of the Sixth Amendment …
Beyond Blakely, Nancy J. King, Susan Riva Klein
Beyond Blakely, Nancy J. King, Susan Riva Klein
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Federal criminal sentencing in the wake of Blakely v. Washington is, to put it charitably, a mess. In holding that Blakely's sentence under the Washington State Sentencing Guidelines was imposed in a manner inconsistent with the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, the decision threatens the operation of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and the presumptive sentencing systems in fourteen states. In Parts I and II of this article, we address how Blakely has affected the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, and how assistant U.S. attorneys, federal public defenders, and district and appellate court judges might proceed in a post-Blakely world. In …
"Apprendi" And Plea Bargaining, Nancy J. King, Susan Riva Klein
"Apprendi" And Plea Bargaining, Nancy J. King, Susan Riva Klein
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Before "Apprendi", prosecutors using recidivism as a club could, and did, regularly insist that defendants admit aggravating facts as part of the plea or face additional time. When the prosecutor's threats of added time were not persuasive and the proof of aggravating facts weak, the defendant prior to "Apprendi" could refuse to admit to the aggravating fact, and plead guilty only to the offense without the aggravating fact. Nothing about "Apprendi" gives additional leverage to the prosecutor in this situation. A defendant who, prior to "Apprendi", decided to risk trial rather than face the aggravated sentence will make the same …
Apres Apprendi, Nancy J. King, Susan R. Klein
Apres Apprendi, Nancy J. King, Susan R. Klein
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
The Court in Apprendi v. New Jersey, ___ U.S. ___ (2000), held as a matter of due process that any fact, other than a prior conviction, that increases the penalty for an offense beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In a longer forthcoming article, we attempt to answer some of the profound questions raised by the case concerning constitutional oversight of legislative authority to define what is a "crime," questions that will ripen over the years as legislatures look for ways around the rule and litigants test these legislative …
Having It Both Ways: Proof That The U.S. Supreme Court Is "Unfairly" Prosecution-Oriented, Christopher Slobogin
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 …