Law Commons^™

The Perverse Effects Of Efficiency In Criminal Process, Darryl K. Brown

Darryl K. Brown

The need for greater efficiency in legal process is an undisputed premise of modern policy, and efficiency’s virtues hardly merit debate, notably by the U.S. Supreme Court. A central part of the story of modern adjudication is the steady gains in case processing efficiency. This, above all else, explains the “vanishing trial” and its replacement by civil settlement and, in criminal courts, by plea bar-gaining.

Defining efficiency in any context, however, is a more complicated endeavor than courts, policymakers, and many commentators commonly acknowledge. It requires first defining ends and means, and even whether a given practice is an end …

Penal Modernism In Theory And Practice, Darryl K. Brown

Darryl K. Brown

This comment on James Whitman's article, "The Case for Penal Modernism: Beyond Utility and Desert," suggests additional reasons why the era of penal modernism was eventually elipsed by retributivism in the U.S., and questions the degree to which penal modernism's fall also represents retributivism's triumph.

Public Welfare Offenses, Darryl K. Brown

Darryl K. Brown

This chapter provides an overview, historical account and critical analysis of Anglo-American public welfare offenses, meaning strict liability crimes generally employed for regulatory purposes. As an explanation for the greater prevalence of these strict liability regulatory crimes in England and the U.S. compared to other jurisdictions, the chapter points to, among other factors, the evolving scope of social duties in modernity and traditional Anglo-American limits on central state administrative capacity.

Defense Counsel, Trial Judges, And Evidence Production Protocols, Darryl K. Brown

Darryl K. Brown

This essay, a contribution to the 2012 Texas Tech Symposium on the Sixth Amendment, argues that constitutional criminal adjudication provisions are fruitfully viewed not primarily as defendant rights but as procedural components that, when employed, maximize the odds that adversarial adjudication will succeed in its various goals, notably accurate judgments. On this view, the state has an interest in how those procedural mechanisms, especially regarding fact investigation and evidence gathering, are invoked or implemented. Deficient attorney performance, on this view, can be understood as a problem of the state’s adversarial adjudication process, for which public officials—notably judges, whose judgments depend …

Why Padilla Doesn't Matter (Much), Darryl K. Brown

Darryl K. Brown

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Padilla v. Kentucky heralds a formal breakthrough in the representation provided to immigrants charged with crimes that trigger deportation, and the decision may signal as well the Court’s recognition of plea bargaining’s dominant role in criminal adjudication. There are good reasons to worry, however, that Padilla’s practical impact will be modest, and for many noncitizen criminal defendants, including probably Jose Padilla himself, nonexistent. The Padilla Court suggested that it expected attorneys to use their newly required awareness of law triggering deportation upon a criminal conviction to inform plea bargain negotiation and even change criminal …

Can Criminal Law Be Controlled?, Darryl K. Brown

Darryl K. Brown

This review of Douglas Husak's 2008 book, Overcriminalization: The Limits of the Criminal Law, summarizes and largely endorses Husak's normative argument about the indefensible expansiveness of much contemporary criminal liability. It then offers a skeptical (or pessimistic) argument about the possibilities for a normative theory such as Husak's to have much effect on criminal justice policy in light of the political barriers to reform.