Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (24)
- Criminal Procedure (20)
- Criminal Law (15)
- Courts (14)
- Evidence (9)
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (5)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (3)
- Civil Law (2)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (2)
- Fourteenth Amendment (2)
- Immigration Law (2)
- Law and Society (2)
- Family Law (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law (1)
- Judges (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Juvenile Law (1)
- Law and Race (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Legal Profession (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Litigation (1)
- Sexuality and the Law (1)
- State and Local Government Law (1)
- Institution
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (9)
- University of Michigan Law School (6)
- Pepperdine University (4)
- SelectedWorks (4)
- Selected Works (3)
-
- Columbia Law School (2)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (2)
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law (1)
- Georgetown University Law Center (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- Southern Methodist University (1)
- St. Mary's University (1)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (1)
- University of Missouri School of Law (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (1)
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (9)
- Pepperdine Law Review (4)
- Articles (3)
- All Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Faculty Publications (2)
-
- Faculty Scholarship (2)
- American Indian Law Review (1)
- Articles & Chapters (1)
- Catholic University Law Review (1)
- Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters (1)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (1)
- Kenneth J Duvall (1)
- Kevin P. Chapman (1)
- Laura I Appleman (1)
- Lauren Sudeall Lucas (1)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (1)
- Michigan Law Review (1)
- Nevada Law Journal (1)
- Reviews (1)
- Richard Daniel Klein (1)
- St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics (1)
- Steven Mulroy (1)
- Terrence Cain (1)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 39
Full-Text Articles in Law
Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. Umali, Andrew J. Vansingel
Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. Umali, Andrew J. Vansingel
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Appellate Division, First Department - People V. Martinez, Jean K. Delisle
Appellate Division, First Department - People V. Martinez, Jean K. Delisle
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. Leon, Madeline Katz, Madeline Klotz
Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. Leon, Madeline Katz, Madeline Klotz
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Appellate Division, First Department - People V. Williams, Brian E. Peterson
Appellate Division, First Department - People V. Williams, Brian E. Peterson
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Right To Waive Competent Counsel: Extending The Faretta Waiver, Augustine Gerard Yee
The Right To Waive Competent Counsel: Extending The Faretta Waiver, Augustine Gerard Yee
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Incompetent Plea Bargaining And Extrajudicial Reforms, Stephanos Bibas
Incompetent Plea Bargaining And Extrajudicial Reforms, Stephanos Bibas
All Faculty Scholarship
Last year, in Lafler v. Cooper and Missouri v. Frye, a five-to-four majority of the Supreme Court held that incompetent lawyering that causes a defendant to reject a plea offer can constitute deficient performance, and the resulting loss of a favorable plea bargain can constitute cognizable prejudice, under the Sixth Amendment. This commentary, published as part of the Harvard Law Review’s Supreme Court issue, analyzes both decisions. The majority and dissenting opinions almost talked past each other, reaching starkly different conclusions because they started from opposing premises: contemporary and pragmatic versus historical and formalist. Belatedly, the Court noticed …
Disentangling Symmetries: Speech, Association, Parenthood, Laurence H. Tribe
Disentangling Symmetries: Speech, Association, Parenthood, Laurence H. Tribe
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky
Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
To Plea Or Not To Plea: Retroactive Availability Of Padilla V. Kentucky To Noncitizen Defendants On State Postconviction Review, Jaclyn Kelley
To Plea Or Not To Plea: Retroactive Availability Of Padilla V. Kentucky To Noncitizen Defendants On State Postconviction Review, Jaclyn Kelley
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
The United States incarcerates hundreds of thousands of noncitizen criminal defendants each year. In 2010, there were about 55,000 "criminal aliens" in federal prisons, accounting for approximately 25 percent of all federal prisoners. In 2009, there were about 296,000 noncitizens in state and local jails. Like Jose, these defendants usually do not know that their convictions may make them automatically deportable under the INA. Under the Supreme Court's recent ruling in Padilla v. Kentucky, criminal defense attorneys have an affirmative duty to give specific, accurate advice to noncitizen clients regarding the deportation risk of potential pleas. This rule helps assure …
Hold On: The Remarkably Resilient, Constitutionally Dubious "48-Hour Hold", Steven Mulroy
Hold On: The Remarkably Resilient, Constitutionally Dubious "48-Hour Hold", Steven Mulroy
Steven Mulroy
This article discusses the surprisingly widespread, little-known practice of “48-hour holds,” where police detain a suspect without charge or access to bail for up to 48 hours to continue their investigation; at the end of 48 hours, they either charge or release him. Although it has not been discussed in the scholarly literature, the practice has occurred in a number of large local jurisdictions over the past few decades, and continues today in some of them. The “holds” often take place, admittedly or tacitly, without the probable cause needed to charge a defendant, and thus in violation of the Fourth …
Presumed Guilty, Terrence Cain
Presumed Guilty, Terrence Cain
Terrence Cain
It would probably surprise the average American that prosecutors need only prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt sometimes. Although the Due Process Clauses of the Constitution require that the government prove each element of an alleged criminal offense beyond a reasonable doubt, the use of statutory presumptions has relieved the government of this responsibility, and in some cases, has even shifted the burden to the defendant to disprove the presumption. Likewise, the Sixth Amendment grants a criminal defendant the right to have the jury and the jury alone determine whether the government has met its burden and ultimately whether the …
The Contradictory Stance On Jury Nullification, Kenneth J. Duvall
The Contradictory Stance On Jury Nullification, Kenneth J. Duvall
Kenneth J Duvall
Arguments about jury nullification in both courts and academia proceed under the assumption that either proponents and opponents of nullification could decisively carry the day. But as current Supreme Court law stands, nullification is at once prohibited and protected. This Article shines a light on the uneasy, confusing compromise in the doctrine, and finds that the two ways out of the dilemma—fully embracing nullification, or rejecting it—are equally taboo to the American legal mind. In Part I, this Article briefly explains the contested history of nullification. In Part II, it examines modern courts’ intermittent recognition of nullification. Part III then …
Testimonial Statements: The Death Of Dying Declarations? - People V. Clay, Sarah R. Gitomer
Testimonial Statements: The Death Of Dying Declarations? - People V. Clay, Sarah R. Gitomer
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Decline Of The Confrontation Clause In New York - People V. Encarnacion, Anthony Fasano
The Decline Of The Confrontation Clause In New York - People V. Encarnacion, Anthony Fasano
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
An Unappealing Decision For New York Dwi Defendants - People V. Pealer, Christopher Gavin
An Unappealing Decision For New York Dwi Defendants - People V. Pealer, Christopher Gavin
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Reclaiming Equality To Reframe Indigent Defense Reform, Lauren Sudeall Lucas
Reclaiming Equality To Reframe Indigent Defense Reform, Lauren Sudeall Lucas
Lauren Sudeall Lucas
Equal access to resources is fundamental to meaningful legal representation, yet for decades, equality arguments have been ignored in litigating indigent defense reform. At a time when underfunded indigent defense systems across the country are failing to provide indigent defendants with adequate representation, the question of resources is even more critical. Traditionally, advocates seeking indigent defense reform have relied on Sixth Amendment arguments to protect the rights of indigents in this context; however, the Sixth Amendment approach suffers from a number of shortcomings that have made it a poor tool for systemic reform, including its exclusive focus on attorney performance …
The Propriety Of Jury Questioning: A Remedy For Perceived Harmless Error, Laurie Forbes Neff
The Propriety Of Jury Questioning: A Remedy For Perceived Harmless Error, Laurie Forbes Neff
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Social Media, The Sixth Amendment, And Restyling: Recent Developments In The Federal Laws Of Evidence, Deborah Jones Merritt
Social Media, The Sixth Amendment, And Restyling: Recent Developments In The Federal Laws Of Evidence, Deborah Jones Merritt
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Taming Negotiated Justice, Stephanos Bibas
Taming Negotiated Justice, Stephanos Bibas
All Faculty Scholarship
After four decades of neglecting laissez-faire plea bargaining, the Supreme Court got it right. In Missouri v. Frye and Lafler v. Cooper, the Court recognized that the Sixth Amendment regulates plea bargaining. Thus, the Court held that criminal defendants can challenge deficient advice that causes them to reject favorable plea bargains and receive heavier sentences after trial. Finally, the Court has brought law to the shadowy plea-bargaining bazaar.
Writing in dissent, Justice Scalia argued that the majority’s opinion “opens a whole new boutique of constitutional jurisprudence (‘plea-bargaining law’).” To which I say: it is about time the Court developed …
Assessing Divisibility In The Armed Career Criminal Act, Ted Koehler
Assessing Divisibility In The Armed Career Criminal Act, Ted Koehler
Michigan Law Review
When courts analyze whether a defendant's prior conviction qualifies as a "violent felony" under the Armed Career Criminal Act's "residual clause," they use a "categorical approach," looking only to the statutory language of the prior offense, rather than the facts disclosed by the record of conviction. But when a defendant is convicted under a "divisible" statute, which encompasses a broader range of conduct, only some of which would qualify as a predicate offense, courts may employ the "modified categorical approach." This approach allows courts to view additional documents to determine whether the jury convicted the defendant of the Armed Career …
The Indigent Defense Crisis, Richard Klein, Robert Spangenberg
The Indigent Defense Crisis, Richard Klein, Robert Spangenberg
Richard Daniel Klein
No abstract provided.
Justice In The Shadowlands: Pretrial Detention, Punishment And The Sixth Amendment, Laura I. Appleman
Justice In The Shadowlands: Pretrial Detention, Punishment And The Sixth Amendment, Laura I. Appleman
Laura I Appleman
This Article contends that our current system of pretrial detention lies in shambles, routinely incarcerating the accused in horrifying conditions often far worse than those convicted offenders existing in prisons. Due to these punitive conditions of incarceration, pretrial detainees appear to have a cognizable claim for the denial of their Sixth Amendment jury trial right, which, at its broadest, forbids punishment for any crime unless a cross-section of the offender’s community adjudicates his crime and finds him guilty. This Article argues that the spirit of the Sixth Amendment jury trial right might apply to many pretrial detainees, due to both …
Confrontation Clause Curiosities: When Logic And Proportion Have Fallen Sloppy Dead, Randolph N. Jonakait
Confrontation Clause Curiosities: When Logic And Proportion Have Fallen Sloppy Dead, Randolph N. Jonakait
Articles & Chapters
No abstract provided.
Reinventing The Wheel: Constructing Ethical Approaches To State Indigent Legal Defense Systems., Bill Piatt
Reinventing The Wheel: Constructing Ethical Approaches To State Indigent Legal Defense Systems., Bill Piatt
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
Indigent defense remains in a state of crisis. Almost fifty years after the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Gideon v. Wainwright, lack of funding, favoritism, inefficiency, and poorly-designed indigent[1]defense plans plague the system, which can best be characterized as being in a state of disrepair. As a result, accused indigent individuals, a vulnerable population, suffer from a lack of adequate representation. This Article reviews the history and implementation of various indigent-defense systems and examines the ethical issues arising from their operation. It offers a guide to reconstructing a model system, including the suggestion that attorneys first recommit the profession to …
Reliability, That Should Be The Question: The Constitutionality Of Using Uncounseled Tribal Court Convictions In Subsequent Federal Trials After Ant, Cavanaugh, And Shavanaux, Samuel D. Newton
American Indian Law Review
No abstract provided.
Confrontation Control, Pamela R. Metzger
Confrontation Control, Pamela R. Metzger
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
After Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 42 (2004), face-to-face confrontation between accused and accuser is the constitutionally normative mode of presentation for testimonial evidence. Yet, eight years into the Crawford revolution, courts routinely hold that counsel can waive a defendant's confrontation rights without even discussing the matter with the defendant. Why? Because counsel, not client, has the authority to decide whether to confront and cross-examine government witnesses.
This Essay, written as part of the Texas Tech Sixth Amendment Symposium, explores this peculiar and perplexing rule. If confrontation is essential to a constitutionally valid criminal trial, how can defense …
A Crisis In Federal Habeas Law, Eve Brensike Primus
A Crisis In Federal Habeas Law, Eve Brensike Primus
Reviews
Everyone recognizes that federal habeas doctrine is a mess. Despite repeated calls for reform, federal judges continue to waste countless hours reviewing habeas petitions only to dismiss the vast majority of them on procedural grounds. Broad change is necessary, but to be effective, such change must be animated by an overarching theory that explains when federal courts should exercise habeas jurisdiction. In Habeas for the Twenty-First Century: Uses, Abuses, and the Future of the Great Writ, Professors Nancy King and Joseph Hoffmann offer such a theory. Drawing on history, current practice, and empirical data, King and Hoffmann find unifying themes …
A Criminal Quartet: The Supreme Court's Resolution Of Four Critical Issues In The Criminal Justice System, Richard Klein
A Criminal Quartet: The Supreme Court's Resolution Of Four Critical Issues In The Criminal Justice System, Richard Klein
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Sky Is Still Not Falling, Richard D. Friedman
The Sky Is Still Not Falling, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Cases since Crawford have mainly fallen into two categories. One involves accusations of crime, made by the apparent victim shortly after the incident. In Michigan v. Bryant, a majority of the Court adopted an unfortunately constricted view of the word "testimonial" in this context. That decision was a consequence of the Court having failed to adopt a robust view of when an accused forfeits the confrontation right. How the Court will deal with this situation-one mistake made in an attempt to compensate for another-is a perplexing and important question. This Essay, though, concentrates on the other principal category of post-Crawford …
Does The Lawyer Make A Difference? Public Defender V. Appointed Counsel, Peter A. Joy, Kevin C. Mcmunigal
Does The Lawyer Make A Difference? Public Defender V. Appointed Counsel, Peter A. Joy, Kevin C. Mcmunigal
Faculty Publications
A recent study found that poor criminal defendants in Philadelphia who were represented by court-appointed private lawyers were more often found guilty and sentenced to more time in prison than similarly situated defendants represented by public defenders. In this column, we review the details of the study, its findings, and its ethical and constitutional implications.