Criminal Law Commons^™

Excessive Force: Justice Requires Refining State Qualified Immunity Standards For Negligent Police Officers, Angie Weiss

Seattle University Law Review SUpra

At the time this Note was written, there was no Washington state equivalent of the § 1983 Civil Rights Act. As plaintiffs look to the Washington state courts as an alternative to federal courts, they will find that Washington state has a different structure of qualified immunity protecting law enforcement officers from liability.

In this Note, Angie Weiss recommends changing Washington state's standard of qualified immunity. This change would ensure plaintiffs have a state court path towards justice when they seek to hold law enforcement officers accountable for harm. Weiss explains the structure and context of federal qualified immunity; compares …

Opening The Door To Fickle-Minded Guilty Pleas? Public Prosecutor V Dinesh S/O Rajantheran, Teng Jun Gerome Goh

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Unlike applications to retract guilty pleas, accused persons are not required to provide valid and sufficient reasons when qualifying their guilty pleas in mitigation. In Criminal Reference No. 5 of 2018, the Court of Appeal held that section 228(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code allows accused persons to qualify their guilty pleas in mitigation to the extent that it amounts to a retraction of their guilty pleas unless there is an abuse of the court’s process. This comment considers the desirability of the current law and suggests that the law applying to such withdrawals of guilty pleas should be …

First Amendment “Harms”, Stephanie H. Barclay

Indiana Law Journal

What role should harm to third parties play in the government’s ability to protect religious rights? The intuitively appealing “harm” principle has animated new theories advanced by scholars who argue that religious exemptions are indefensible whenever they result in cognizable harm to third parties. This third-party harm theory is gaining traction in some circles, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s pending cases in Little Sisters of the Poor and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. While focusing on harm appears at first to provide an appealing, simple, and neutral principle for avoiding other difficult moral questions, the definition of harm …

The Hard Truths Of Progressive Prosecution And A Path To Realizing The Movement’S Promise, Seema Gajwani, Max G. Lesser

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Defender General, Daniel Epps, William Ortman

Scholarship@WashULaw

The United States needs a Defender General—a public official charged with representing the collective interests of criminal defendants before the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court is effectively our nation’s chief regulator of criminal justice. But in the battle to influence the Court’s rulemaking, government interests have substantial structural advantages. As compared to counsel for defendants, government lawyers—and particularly those from the U.S. Solicitor General’s office—tend to be more experienced advocates who have more credibility with the Court. Most importantly, government lawyers can act strategically to play for bigger long-term victories, while defense lawyers must zealously advocate …