Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Death row; Capital punishment; Death penalty; competency hearing; ABA ethical guidelines; Shinn v. Ramirez; Capital defendants; Post-conviction appeals; Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act; AEDPA; Furman v. Georgia; trial advocacy; ineffective assistance of counsel; (1)
- Gun Law; Gun Regulation; Gun Control; Second Amendment; New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (1)
- Inc. v. Bruen; New York Penal Law; Sensitive Place Laws; Concealed Carry Improvement Act; Antonyuk v. Hochul; Sullivan Law; District of Columbia v. Heller; Concealed Carry; Training Requirements; Discriminatory Policing; Crime Enforcement; NYPD; Disproportionate Impact; Ambiguity (1)
- Jencks Act; criminal prosecution; government witness; Jencks v. United States; Sixth Amendment; cross-examination; fair trial; FRCP 16; Brady v. Maryland; Giglio v. United States; discovery; disclosure; prosecution; pretrial discovery (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Law
Good Intentions With Bad Consequences: Post-Bruen Gun Legislation In New York, Michal E. Folczyk
Good Intentions With Bad Consequences: Post-Bruen Gun Legislation In New York, Michal E. Folczyk
Journal of Law and Policy
In response to a changing landscape for firearm licensing, New York State adopted training requirements for handgun ownership and sensitive place laws. Prior to obtaining a handgun license, training requirements ensure that applicants will be able to safely use a firearm. Upon obtaining a firearm license, sensitive place laws limit where a licensed individual may or may not bring their firearm, as a preventative measure. A violation of a sensitive place law could not only bring revocation of one’s license to carry a firearm, but also felony charges. Although well-intentioned by New York State, unintended consequences attach. This Note explores …
State Of Delay: Are Outdated Capital Post-Conviction Defense Tactics Undermining Effectiveness And The Attorney-Client Relationship?, Lyle C. May
Journal of Law and Policy
In 2018, death row prisoner Scott Allen was ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation to determine whether he was competent enough to fire his appointed attorneys. The competency hearing was not ordered by Scott’s counsel; rather, a superior court judge did so at the behest of an undisclosed third party. The problem was that Scott Allen had no history or symptoms of an intellectual disability or mental illness, nor was either a mitigatory claim in his appeal. The attorney-client conflict was triggered by Scott’s pro se effort to remove counsel after they ignored his lawful instructions to include potentially exculpatory …
Defendants In The Dark: How The Jencks Act Is Incompatible With The Adversarial Legal System, Eli J. Esakoff
Defendants In The Dark: How The Jencks Act Is Incompatible With The Adversarial Legal System, Eli J. Esakoff
Journal of Law and Policy
The Jencks Act is a McCarthy Era law that prohibits compelling the disclosure of any statement made by a government witness in a federal criminal prosecution until after the witness has testified at trial. Passed in 1957 in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Jencks v. United States, the Act’s life in Congress was “nasty, brutish, and short.” In prosecuting its anti-communist “witch hunts” of the era, the government strove to keep hidden as much of its case against those accused as possible. Against this backdrop of the desire for secrecy, the Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant …