Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

2010

SelectedWorks

Criminal Law and Procedure

Colin Miller

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Anchors Away: Why The Anchoring Effect Suggests That Judges Should Be Able To Participate In Plea Discussions, Colin Miller Sep 2010

Anchors Away: Why The Anchoring Effect Suggests That Judges Should Be Able To Participate In Plea Discussions, Colin Miller

Colin Miller

The “anchoring effect” is cognitive bias by which people evaluate numbers by focusing on a reference point – an anchor – and adjusting up or down from that anchor. Unfortunately, people usually do not sufficiently adjust away from their anchors, so the initial choice of anchors has an inordinate effect on their final estimates. More than 90% of all criminal cases are resolved by plea bargains. In the vast majority of those cases, the prosecutor makes the initial plea offer, and prosecutors often make high initial offers. Assuming that the prosecutor’s opening offer operates as an anchor, nearly all criminal …


Anchors Away: Why The Anchoring Effect Suggests That Judges Should Be Able To Participate In Plea Discussions, Colin Miller Sep 2010

Anchors Away: Why The Anchoring Effect Suggests That Judges Should Be Able To Participate In Plea Discussions, Colin Miller

Colin Miller

The “anchoring effect” is cognitive bias by which people evaluate numbers by focusing on a reference point – an anchor – and adjusting up or down from that anchor. Unfortunately, people usually do not sufficiently adjust away from their anchors, so the initial choice of anchors has an inordinate effect on their final estimates. More than 90% of all criminal cases are resolved by plea bargains. In the vast majority of those cases, the prosecutor makes the initial plea offer, and prosecutors often make high initial offers. Assuming that the prosecutor’s opening offer operates as an anchor, nearly all criminal …


Deal Or No Deal: Why Courts Should Allow Defendants To Present Evidence That They Rejected Favorable Plea Bargains, Colin Miller Aug 2010

Deal Or No Deal: Why Courts Should Allow Defendants To Present Evidence That They Rejected Favorable Plea Bargains, Colin Miller

Colin Miller

Federal Rule of Evidence 410 deems inadmissible statements made during plea discussions when offered “against the defendant who made the plea or was a participant in plea discussions….” Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s opinion in United States v. Mezzanatto, however, prosecutors can, and often do, force defendants to waive the protections of this Rule to get to the plea bargaining table. Conversely, courts categorically have found that defendants cannot present evidence that they rejected favorable plea bargains, despite the plain language of the Rule not precluding the admission of such evidence. This article addresses the question of whether courts can …


Lawyers, Guns, And Money: Why The Tiahrt Amendment’S Ban On The Admissibility Of Atf Trace Data In State Court Actions Violates The Commerce Clause And The Tenth Amendment, Colin Miller Mar 2010

Lawyers, Guns, And Money: Why The Tiahrt Amendment’S Ban On The Admissibility Of Atf Trace Data In State Court Actions Violates The Commerce Clause And The Tenth Amendment, Colin Miller

Colin Miller

The Tiahrt Amendment provides in relevant part that ATF trace data "shall be inadmissible in evidence, and shall not be used, relied on, or disclosed in any manner, nor shall testimony or other evidence be permitted based on the data, in a civil action in any State (including the District of Columbia) or Federal court..." This Amendment has hamstrung cities and localities which, in an effort to combat crime with civil litigation, have brought actions against the gun industry sounding in public nuisance, with trace data being crucial to the success of such actions. Because this Amendment regulates state as …