Law Commons^™

Summary Of Toston V. State, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. 87, Kendra Kisling

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered an appeal of a district court order denying a writ of habeas corpus.

Summary Of Rogers V. State, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 88, Amanda Ireland

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An appeal from a district court denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, with consideration of the scope and applicability of Graham v. Florida to a term-of-years sentence.

Summary Of State V. Dist. Ct., 127 Nev. Adv. Op. 84, Michelle Newman

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered the State’s petition for a writ of mandamus challenging the district court’s exclusion of blood alcohol test results obtained by retrograde extrapolation from the prosecution of defendant for driving under the influence.

No Change In Sight For Sentencing Guidelines, Wes R. Porter

Publications

In the post-Booker era, the commission must reinvent itself to provide a useful tool for the courts in determining punishment, explains Wes Reber Porter of Golden Gate University School of Law.

Apprendi And The Dynamics Of Guilty Pleas, Stephanos Bibas

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Notes On Borrowing And Convergence, Robert L. Tsai, Nelson Tebbe

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This is a response to Jennifer E. Laurin, "Trawling for Herring: Lessons in Doctrinal Borrowing and Convergence," 111 Colum. L. Rev. 670 (2011), which analyzes the Supreme Court's resort to tort-based concepts to limit the reach of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule. We press three points. First, there are differences between a general and specific critique of constitutional borrowing. Second, the idea of convergence as a distinct phenomenon from borrowing has explanatory potential and should be further explored. Third, to the extent convergence occurs, it matters whether concerns of judicial administration or political reconstruction are driving doctrinal changes.

Notes On Borrowing And Convergence, Robert L. Tsai, Nelson Tebbe

Faculty Scholarship

This is a response to Jennifer E. Laurin, "Trawling for Herring: Lessons in Doctrinal Borrowing and Convergence," 111 Colum. L. Rev. 670 (2011), which analyzes the Supreme Court's resort to tort-based concepts to limit the reach of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule. We press three points. First, there are differences between a general and specific critique of constitutional borrowing. Second, the idea of convergence as a distinct phenomenon from borrowing has explanatory potential and should be further explored. Third, to the extent convergence occurs, it matters whether concerns of judicial administration or political reconstruction are driving doctrinal changes.

Summary Of Wilson V. State, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. 68, Aaron K. Haar

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered an appeal from the district court’s dismissal of Petitioner’s third state petition for writ of habeas corpus in light of McConnell v. State.

Summary Of Nunnery V. State, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. 69, Sabrina Dolson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considers an appeal of a death penalty sentence for a first-degree murder conviction.

Summary Of Stephans V. State, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. 65, Emily Navasca

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered an appeal of a grand larceny conviction, based on witness testimony used to prove the value of the stolen goods.

A Look At In Re Fabian A.: Examining The Extension Of Due Process Protections And Failure To Object As Waiver In The Juvenile Justice System, Elizabeth Bannon

Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal

Vol. 11, No. 1

A Brave New World Of Stop And Frisk, Ronald J. Bacigal

Law Faculty Publications

In this article, the author Ron Bacigal discusses the editorials, The Shame of New York by Bob Herbert and Fighting Crime Where the Criminals Are by Heather MacDonald. These editorials were prompted by the New York City Police Department's release of figures regarding "stop and frisk" incidents within New York City.' MacDonald and Herbert reacted to the same statistical report by putting two very different spins on the raw data. While it's always helpful to compile empirical evidence, Bacigal suggests that we also need to look beyond the mere numbers. If you put aside anecdotal versions of encounters between minorities …

Educating Prosecutors And Supreme Court Justices About Brady V. Maryland, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The author reviews the Supreme Court decision in Connick v. Thompson and provides a course outline, including problems, for training prosecutors on their duty to disclose materially favorable evidence to the defendant under Brady v. Maryland.

Review Of Sex, Murder, And The Unwritten Law: Courting Judicial Mayhem, Texas Style. By Bill Neal., Paul N. Spellman

Great Plains Research: A Journal of Natural and Social Sciences

"If, as has often been contended, truth is the first casualty of traditional warfare, then logic, it appears, is the first casualty of sexual warfare." And with that thematic statement in hand, author Bill Neal is off to the proverbial races with an often delightful, sometimes troubling, and generally entertaining legal discourse on the so-called "unwritten law": that a cuckolded husband or a woman wronged has the God-given right to avenge or be avenged, even to redress by murder. With a curiously dispassionate, or at least overly serious, foreword by Cal State-Fullerton professor Gordon Morris Bakken, Neal's tales of adultery, …

Covenants For The Sword, Alice Ristroph

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Ford V. State, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 55, Alan R. Smith

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a district court judgment of conviction, by way of a jury verdict, for pandering of prostitution.

Summary Of State V. Hughes, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. 56, Brandon Sendall

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a district court order dismissing a production of child pornography charge, based on the conclusion that NRS 200.710 is unconstitutionally vague.

Summary Of Adam V. State, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 54, Matthew Vantusko

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An appeal from a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a jury verdict, for trafficking in a controlled substance.

Brief Of Amici Curiae On Behalf Of Appellants, Paul Dewolfe, Jr., Et Al. V. Quinton Richmond, Et Al., 2011 No. 34, A.J. Bellido De Luna, Michael Pinard

Court Briefs

In this case the appellants sought to overturn a decision by the Circuit Court for Baltimore City that held criminal defendants have a right to representation by an attorney at an initial bail hearing. Due to their concern about the quality of justice given to criminal defendants in the state’s criminal justice process, law professors at both the University of Baltimore and the University of Maryland filed an amicus brief with the Maryland Court of Appeals in support of the appellees.

The amici presented one issue: Did a Court of Appeals decision in 2001 holding that the Maryland Public Defender …

Confrontation Clause Again Before High Court, Robert K. Calhoun

Publications

This past term, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the latest in a series of confrontation clause cases that began in 2004 with Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36. In Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 11 C.D.O.S. 7706, the court held that the confrontation clause does not permit the government to introduce a forensic lab report in a criminal trial through the in-court testimony of an analyst who did not personally perform or observe the test that formed the basis for the report.

Public Wrongs And The ‘Criminal Law’S Business’: When Victims Won’T Share, Michelle Madden Dempsey

Working Paper Series

Amongst the many valuable contributions that Professor Antony Duff has made to criminal law theory is his account of what it means for a wrong to be public in character. In this chapter, I sketch an alternative way of thinking about criminalization, one which attempts to remain true to the important insights that illuminate Duff’s account, while providing (it is hoped) a more satisfying explanation of cases involving victims who reject the criminal law’s intervention.

Bargaining Inside The Black Box, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

When jurors are presented with a menu of criminal verdict options and they cannot reach a consensus among them, what should they do? Available evidence suggests they are prone to compromise—that is, jurors will negotiate with each other and settle on a verdict in the middle, often on a lesser-included offense. The suggestion that jurors compromise is not new; it is supported by empirical evidence, well-accepted by courts and commentators, and unsurprising given the pressure jurors feel to reach agreement and the different individual views they likely hold. There are, however, some who say intrajury negotiation represents a failure of …

"Introduction" (Chapter 1) Of Stories About Science In Law: Literary And Historical Images Of Acquired Expertise (Ashgate 2011), David S. Caudill

Working Paper Series

This is the introductory chapter of Stories About Science in Law: Literary and Historical Images of Acquired Expertise (Ashgate, 2011), explaining that the book presents examples of how literary accounts can provide a supplement to our understanding of science in law. Challenging the view that law and science are completely different, I focus on stories that explore the relationship between law and science, and identify cultural images of science that prevail in legal contexts. In contrast to other studies on the transfer and construction of expertise in legal settings, the book considers the intersection of three interdisciplinary projects-- law and …

Lawyers Judging Experts: Oversimplifying Science And Undervaluing Advocacy To Construct An Ethical Duty?, David S. Caudill

Working Paper Series

My focus is on an apparent trend at the intersection of the fields of evidentiary standards for expert admissibility and professional responsibility, namely the eagerness to place more ethical responsibilities on lawyers to vet their proffered expertise to ensure its reliability. My reservations about this trend are not only based on its troubling implications for the lawyer’s duty as a zealous advocate, which already has obvious limitations (because of lawyers’ conflicting duties to the court), but are also based on the problematic aspects of many reliability determinations. To expect attorneys—and this is what the proponents of a duty to vet …

Overcriminalization: Is There A Problem To Solve?, Roger Fairfax

Presentations

No abstract provided.

Introduction: Appreciating Bill Stuntz, Michael Klarman, David A. Skeel Jr., Carol Steiker

All Faculty Scholarship

The past several decades have seen a renaissance in criminal procedure as a cutting edge discipline, and as one inseparably linked to substantive criminal law. The renaissance can be traced in no small part to the work of a single scholar: William Stuntz. This essay is the introductory chapter to The Political Heart of Criminal Procedure: Essays on Themes of William J. Stuntz (forthcoming, Cambridge University Press, 2012), which brings together twelve leading American criminal justice scholars whose own writings have been profoundly influenced by Stuntz and his work. After briefly chronicling the arc of Stuntz’s career, the essay provides …

Summary Of Cortes V. State, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 44, Sean W. Mcdonald

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from conviction of possession of a controlled substance with intent to sell.

Summary Of Rose V. State, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 43, Michael Li

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An appeal of a second-degree murder conviction by jury verdict.

Summary Of Winkle V. Warden, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 42, Tim Mott

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing Respondents to release her to the 305 program based on the language of NRS 209.427 and 209.429.

Executions In America: How Constitutional Interpretation Has Restricted Capital Punishment, Andrea Paone

Pell Scholars and Senior Theses

In upholding the constitutionality of capital punishment, the United States Supreme Court has utilized a strict construction interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, which has led the opponents of capital punishment to abandon the Due Process approach and look to the Eighth Amendment, for which the justices utilize a loose construction interpretation.