Law Commons^™

Deconstructing Burglary, Ira P. Robbins

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

The law of burglary has long played a vital role in protecting hearth and home. Because of the violation of one’s personal space, few crimes engender more fear than burglary; thus, the law should provide necessary safety and security against that fear. Among other things, current statutes aim to deter trespassers from committing additional crimes by punishing them more severely based on their criminal intent before they execute their schemes. Burglary law even protects domestic violence victims against abusers who attempt to invade their lives and terrorize them.

However, the law of burglary has expanded and caused so many problems …

Redistributing Justice, Benjamin Levin, Kate Levine

Scholarship@WashULaw

This article surfaces an obstacle to decarceration hiding in plain sight: progressives’ continued support for the carceral system. Despite increasingly prevalent critiques of criminal law from progressives, there hardly is a consensus on the left in opposition to the carceral state. Many left-leaning academics and activists who may critique the criminal system writ large remain enthusiastic about criminal law in certain areas—often areas where defendants are imagined as powerful and victims as particularly vulnerable. In this article, we offer a novel theory for what animates the seemingly conflicted attitude among progressives toward criminal punishment—the hope that the criminal system can …

You Can’T Teach Old Katz New Tricks: It’S Time To Revitalize The Fourth Amendment, Jeremy Connell

University of Miami Law Review

For over half a century, the Court’s decision in Katz v. United States has been the lodestar for applying the Fourth Amendment. The Katz test has produced a litany of confusing and irreconcilable decisions in which the Court has carved exceptions into the doctrine and then carved exceptions into the exceptions. These decisions often leave lower courts with minimal guidance on how to apply the framework to new sets of facts and leave legal scholars and commenters befuddled and frustrated with the Court’s explanations for the rulings. The Court’s decision in Carpenter v. United States represents the apex of Katz’s …

Giglio Feds: The Void Of Ethical Leadership Within Federal Law Enforcement, Christopher J. Boosey

Helm's School of Government Conference - American Revival: Citizenship & Virtue

No abstract provided.

“Take The Motherless Children Off The Street”: Fetal Alcohol Syndrome And The Criminal Justice System, Michael L. Perlin, Heather Ellis Cucolo

University of Miami Law Review

Remarkably, there has been minimal academic legal literature about the interplay between fetal alcohol syndrome dis- order (“FASD”) and critical aspects of many criminal trials, including issues related to the role of experts, quality of counsel, competency to stand trial, the insanity defense, and sentencing and the death penalty. In this Article, the co-authors will first define fetal alcohol syndrome and explain its significance to the criminal justice system. We will then look at the specific role of experts in cases involving defendants with FASD and consider adequacy of counsel. Next, we will discuss the impact of FASD on the …

Policing & The Problem Of Physical Restraint, Steven Arrigg Koh

Faculty Scholarship

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits unreasonable “seizures” and thus renders unlawful police use of excessive force. On one hand, this definition is expansive. In the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2021 Term, in Torres v. Madrid, the Court clarified that a “seizure” includes any police application of physical force to the body with intent to restrain. Crucially, Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion emphasized that police may seize even when merely laying “the end of a finger” on a layperson’s body. And yet, the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment totality-of-the-circumstances reasonableness balancing test is notoriously imprecise—a “factbound morass,” in the famous …

On Warrants & Waiting: Electronic Warrants & The Fourth Amendment, Tracy Hresko Pearl

Indiana Law Journal

Police use of electronic warrant (“e-warrant”) technology has increased significantly in recent years. E-warrant technology allows law enforcement to submit, and magistrate judges to review and approve, warrant applications on computers, smartphones, and tablets, often without any direct communication. Police officers report that they favor e-warrants over their traditional, paper counterparts because they save officers a significant amount of time in applying for warrants by eliminating the need to appear in-person before a magistrate. Legal scholars have almost uniformly praised e-warrant technology as well, arguing that use of these systems will increase the number of warrants issued throughout the United …

Outcome Sensitivity And The Constitutional Law Of Criminal Procedure, Lee Kovarsky

Indiana Law Journal

Iconic criminal procedure doctrines that perform the same function go by different names. When constitutionally disfavored conduct taints a criminal proceeding, courts must determine how much the taint affected an outcome—and whether the damage requires judicial relief. These doctrinal constructs calibrate judicial responses to, among other things, deficient defense lawyering (prejudice), wrongful State suppression (materiality), unlawful policing (attenuation), and an assortment of trial-court mistakes (harmless error). I refer to these constructs, which tightly orbit the constitutional law of criminal procedure, as rules of “outcome sensitivity.” Formal differences in sensitivity rules remain enduring puzzles subject to only the most superficial inspection. …

The Ultimate Injustice: States' Failure To Take Steps To Prevent Wrongful Convictions And, When Wrongful Convictions Are Exposed, To Provide Adequate Assistance To Exonerees, Natalie Lahera

FIU Law Review

Among the many rights guaranteed by the Constitution are the rights to a presumption of innocence, equal protection, due process, a speedy trial, a trial by jury, and legal counsel, if indigent and charged with a serious crime. But those rights do not ensure that the justice system succeeds every time. The United States has exonerated over 3,000 individuals since 1989. The exonerees have collectedly lost over 26,700 years of their lives. Each exoneration has provided insight into the causes of wrongful convictions, the issues with current compensation laws, and even the changes that need to be implemented to avoid …

The Conflict Among African American Penal Interests: Rethinking Racial Equity In Criminal Procedure, Trevor George Gardner

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Article argues that neither the criminal justice reform platform nor the penal abolition platform shows the ambition necessary to advance each of the primary African American interests in penal administration. It contends, first, that abolitionists have rightly called for a more robust conceptualization of racial equity in criminal procedure. Racial equity in criminal procedure should be considered in terms of both process at the level of the individual, and the number of criminal procedures at the level of the racial group—in terms of both the quality and “quantity” of stops, arrests, convictions, and the criminal sentencings that result in …

After The Criminal Justice System, Benjamin Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

Since the 1960s, the “criminal justice system” has operated as the common label for a vast web of actors and institutions. But, as critiques of mass incarceration have entered the mainstream, academics, activists, and advocates increasingly have stopped referring to the “criminal justice system.” Instead, they have opted for critical labels—the criminal legal system, the criminal punishment system, the prison industrial complex, etc. What does this re-labeling accomplish? Does this change in language matter to broader efforts at criminal justice reform or abolition? Or, does an emphasis on labels and language distract from substantive engagement with the injustices of contemporary …

“Progressive” Prosecutors And “Proper” Punishments, Benjamin Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

After decades of relative inattention to prosecutorial elections, academics and activists recently have focused on “progressive prosecutors” as a promising avenue for criminal justice reform. That said, the growing literature on progressive prosecutors reflects little clarity about what makes a prosecutor “progressive.” Recent campaigns suggest disparate visions of how to operationalize “progressive prosecution.” In this chapter, I describe four ideal types of progressive prosecutor: (1) the progressive who prosecutes, (2) the proceduralist prosecutor, (3) the prosecutorial progressive, and (4) the anti-carceral prosecutor. Looking to sentencing policy as a case study, I examine how these different ideal types illustrate different visions …

Prosecuting The Crisis, Benjamin Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

Over the past decade, activists and academics have celebrated the rise of the so-called “progressive prosecutor” movement. District attorney candidates—often former public defenders or civil rights lawyers—have promised to use prosecutorial discretion to address the injustices of the criminal system. A proliferation of such campaigns, and the electoral successes of some of these candidates have raised questions about progressive prosecution: what does it actually mean to be a progressive prosecutor? Does progressive prosecution work? Do progressive candidates follow through on campaign promises? And, how enthusiastic should defense attorneys, reformers, and critics of the carceral state be about progressive prosecution? The …

Hiding In Plain Language: A Solution To The Pandemic Riddle Of A Suspended Grand Jury, An Expiring Statute Of Limitations, And The Fifth Amendment, Nicole D. Mariani

University of Miami Law Review

Under the statute of limitations applicable to most federal crimes, 18 U.S.C. § 3282(a), “no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any offense, not capital, unless the indictment is found or the information is instituted within five years next after such offense shall have been committed.” That long-standing, generally uncontroversial procedural statute was thrust into the spotlight in 2020, when courts, prosecutors, and criminal defendants confronted an unprecedented and extraordinary scenario.
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many federal district courts suspended grand juries to prevent the spread of the highly contagious life-threatening virus through group congregation. Indeed, …

Prosecution In Public, Prosecution In Private, Lauren M. Ouziel

Notre Dame Law Review

Criminal procedure has long set a boundary between public and private in criminal enforcement: generally speaking, enforcement decisions at the post-charging stage are exposed to some degree of public view, while those at the pre-charging stage remain almost entirely secret. The allocation of public and private is, at heart, an allocation of power—and the current allocation is a relic. When private prosecutors were the mainstay of criminal enforcement, public court processes effectively constrained them. But those processes do little to constrain the spaces where enforcement power today resides: in decisions by the servants of a state-run, professionalized enforcement apparatus on …

The Broken Fourth Amendment Oath, Laurent Sacharoff

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

The Fourth Amendment requires that warrants be supported by “Oath or affirmation.” Under current doctrine, a police officer may swear the oath to obtain a warrant merely by repeating the account of an informant. This Article shows, however, that the Fourth Amendment, as originally understood, required that the real accuser with personal knowledge swear the oath.

That real-accuser requirement persisted for nearly two centuries. Almost all federal courts and most state courts from 1850 to 1960 held that the oath, by its very nature, required a witness with personal knowledge. Only in 1960 did the Supreme Court hold in Jones …

Regulating Police Chokeholds, Trevor George Gardner, Esam Al-Shareffi

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Article presents findings from an analysis of police chokehold policies enacted at the federal, state, and municipal levels of government. In addition to identifying the jurisdictions that restricted police chokeholds in the wake of George Floyd’s death on May 25, 2020, the Article conveys (via analysis of an original dataset) the considerable variance in the quality of police chokehold regulation. While many jurisdictions regulate the police chokehold, the strength of such regulations should not be taken for granted. Police chokehold policies vary by the type of chokehold barred (“air choke” and/or carotid choke), the degree of the chokehold restriction, …

The Informed Jury, Daniel Epps, William Ortman

Scholarship@WashULaw

The right to a criminal jury trial is a constitutional disappointment. Cases almost never make it to a jury because of plea bargaining. In the few cases that do, the jury is relegated to a narrow factfinding role that denies it normative voice or the ability to serve as a meaningful check on excessive punishment.

One simple change could situate the jury where it belongs, at the center of the criminal process. The most important thing juries do in criminal cases is authorize state punishment. But today, when a jury returns a guilty verdict, it authorizes punishment without any idea …

Criminal Law Exceptionalism, Benjamin Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

For over half a century, U.S. prison populations have ballooned and criminal codes have expanded. In recent years, a growing awareness of mass incarceration and the harms of criminal law across lines of race and class has led to a backlash of anti-carceral commentary and social movement energy. Academics and activists have adopted a critical posture, offering not only small-bore reforms, but full-fledged arguments for the abolition of prisons, police, and criminal legal institutions. Where criminal law was once embraced by commentators as a catchall solution to social problems, increasingly it is being rejected, or at least questioned. Instead of …

Criminal Justice Expertise, Benjamin Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

For decades, commentators have adopted a story of mass incarceration’s rise as caused by “punitive populism.” Growing prison populations, expanding criminal codes, and raced and classed disparities in enforcement result from “pathological politics”: voters and politicians act in a vicious feedback loop, driving more criminal law and punishment. The criminal system’s problems are political. But how should society solve these political problems? Scholars often identify two kinds of approaches: (1) the technocratic, which seeks to wrest power from irrational and punitive voters, replacing electoral politics with agencies and commissions; and (2) the democratic, which treats criminal policy as insufficiently responsive …

Victims’ Rights Revisited, Benjamin Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Essay responds to Bennett Capers's article, "Against Prosecutors." I offer four critiques of Capers’s proposal to bring back private prosecutions: (A) that shifting power to victims still involves shifting power to the carceral state and away from defendants; (B) that defining the class of victims will pose numerous problems; C) that privatizing prosecution reinforces a troubling impulse to treat social problems at the individual level; and (D) broadly, that these critiques suggest that Capers has traded the pathologies of “public” law for the pathologies of “private” law. Further, I argue that the article reflects a new, left-leaning vision of …

Frankly, It's A Mess: Requiring Courts To Transparently "Redline" Affidavits In The Face Of Franks Challenges, Diana Bibb

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I provides a brief overview of the Fourth Amendment, probable cause, and the exclusionary rule. Part II discusses Franks v. Delaware, the development of the challenge’s framework, and subsequent expansions to the doctrine made by the lower courts. Next, Part III argues that, despite the aforementioned expansions, courts have consistently weakened Franks. Notably, the Supreme Court refuses to consider Franks issues, including the multitude of splits over which standard of review is applicable. Moreover, some circuits have developed their own minute rules that have chiseled away at the effectiveness of a Franks challenge. Part IV proposes that …

A Comparative Examination Of Police Interrogation Of Criminal Suspects In Australia, Canada, England And Wales, New Zealand, And The United States, Carol A. Brook, Bruno Fiannaca, David Harvey, Paul Marcus, Renee Pomerance, Paul Roberts

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The interrogation process is central to the investigation and resolution of criminal matters throughout the world. It is fundamental to a comprehensive understanding of comparative criminal procedure to study and appreciate the different approaches to the interrogation process in different nations. This Article developed through a series of conversations between six international criminal justice professionals— practicing attorneys, scholars, and judges—regarding the interrogation practices and rules in their respective countries. Providing a comparative look at this important area, this Article examines the applicable practices and procedures in the common law nations of Australia, Canada, England and Wales, New Zealand, and the …

Divided Court Issues Bright-Line Ruling On Fourth Amendment Seizures, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

When Is Police Interrogation Really Police Interrogation? A Look At The Application Of The Miranda Mandate, Paul Marcus

Catholic University Law Review

Decades after the Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona, questions abound as to what constitutes interrogation when a suspect is in custody. What appeared a concise, uniform rule has, in practice, left the Fifth Amendment waters muddied. This article addresses a potential disconnect between law enforcement and the courts by analyzing examples of issues arising from Miranda’s application in an array of case law. Ultimately, it attempts to clarify an ambiguity by offering a standard for what conduct classifies as an interrogation.

White V. Hesse: Challenging An Oklahoma County's Bail Practices Under The Americans With Disabilities Act And The Rehabilitation Act, Andrew Hamm

Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Surveillance And The Tyrant Test, Andrew Guthrie Ferguson

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

How should society respond to police surveillance technologies? This question has been at the center of national debates around facial recog- nition, predictive policing, and digital tracking technologies. It is a debate that has divided activists, law enforcement officials, and academ- ics and will be a central question for years to come as police surveillance technology grows in scale and scope. Do you trust police to use the tech- nology without regulation? Do you ban surveillance technology as a manifestation of discriminatory carceral power that cannot be reformed? Can you regulate police surveillance with a combination of technocratic rules, policies, …

Imagining The Progressive Prosecutor, Benjamin Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

As criminal justice reform has attracted greater public support, a new brand of district attorney candidate has arrived: the “progressive prosecutors.” Commentators increasingly have keyed on “progressive prosecutors” as offering a promising avenue for structural change, deserving of significant political capital and academic attention. This essay asks an unanswered threshold question: what exactly is a “progressive prosecutor”? Is that a meaningful category at all, and if so, who is entitled to claim the mantle? In this essay, I argue that “progressive prosecutor” means many different things to many different people. These differences in turn reveal important fault lines in academic …

Case Preview: When Is A Fleeing Suspect “Seized”?, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable “searches” and “seizures.” On Wednesday, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral argument in Torres v. Madrid, a case that will provide important guidance on what constitutes a Fourth Amendment seizure. Here’s a rundown of the case starting with the relevant facts and procedural history, followed by a discussion of the legal issues and finally a couple of things to watch for at the argument.

Flipping The Script On Brady, Ion Meyn

Indiana Law Journal

Brady v. Maryland imposes a disclosure obligation on the prosecutor and, for this

reason, is understood to burden the prosecutor. This Article asks whether Brady also

benefits the prosecutor, and if so, how and to what extent does it accomplish this?

This Article first considers Brady’s structural impact—how the case influenced

broader dynamics of litigation. Before Brady, legislative reform transformed civil

and criminal litigation by providing pretrial information to civil defendants but not

to criminal defendants. Did this disparate treatment comport with due process?

Brady arguably answered this question by brokering a compromise: in exchange for

imposing minor obligations on …