Criminal Law Commons^™

Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure. Rule 55 – Default Judgement, Robert Bloom

Robert Bloom

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Hidalgo V. District Court, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. 59, Barbra E. Zess

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Luis Hidalgo III and Anabel Espindola, awaiting a capital murder trial, made a petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenging the alleged aggravating circumstances (solicitation to commit murder) as not being “a felony involving the use or threat of violence to the person of another,” as required by NRS 200.033(2)(b). The other aggravator, murder to receive money, was successfully challenged as violating SCR 250(4)(c) requirements.

Statistics In The Jury Box: How Jurors Respond To Mitochondrial Dna Match Probabilities, David H. Kaye, Valerie P. Hans, B. Michael Dann, Erin J. Farley, Stephanie Albertson

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This article describes parts of an unusually realistic experiment on the comprehension of expert testimony on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequencing in a criminal trial for robbery. Specifically, we examine how jurors who responded to summonses for jury duty evaluated portions of videotaped testimony involving probabilities and statistics. Although some jurors showed susceptibility to classic fallacies in interpreting conditional probabilities, the jurors as a whole were not overwhelmed by a 99.98% exclusion probability that the prosecution presented. Cognitive errors favoring the defense were more prevalent than ones favoring the prosecution. These findings lend scant support to the legal argument that mtDNA …

Death Penalty Law, Therese M. Day

Mercer Law Review

This Article provides a survey of death penalty case law in Georgia from June 1, 2006 through May 31, 2007. The cases include those that were heard by the Georgia Supreme Court on interim appeal and direct appeal,1 and discussion is limited to claims which present new issues of law, refine existing law, or are otherwise instructive. This Article does not discuss holdings in capital cases that are common to all criminal appeals because these are discussed elsewhere in this Survey.

Summary Of Wilson V. State Of Nevada, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 54, Tanya Gaylord

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

No abstract provided.

What Is A Business Crime?, Richard A. Booth

Working Paper Series

Criminal prosecution has been used with increasing frequency recently in connection with a variety of business failures and other financial offenses. Indeed, it appears that there are few such offenses that cannot be prosecuted criminally even though they also give rise to civil remedies. While some such offenses seem to be quite serious frauds, others seem to be as minor as getting the accounting rules wrong. Thus, the question addressed in this essay is how to define a business crime and what should be the proper role of criminal prosecution in connection with business offenses. I start with the proposition …

Rethinking Dui Law In Virginia, Monte Kuligowski

University of Richmond Law Review

As the demand for safer roadways needs little supporting argument, I turn to the constitutional problem of strict criminal liability law, followed with a brief analysis of criminal intent and strict liability law within the criminal system, some examples of how other states have responded to the inherent tensions, and a few specific thoughts for the legislature to consider.

Has A New Day Dawned For Indigent Defense In Virginia?, Robert E. Shepherd Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pro Se Litigation: Best Practices From A Judge's Perspective, Hon. Beverly W. Snukals, Glen H. Sturtevant Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law And Procedure, Marla G. Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

The authors have endeavored to select from the many appellate cases those that have the most significant precedential value. The article also outlines some of the most consequential changes tothe law enacted by the Virginia General Assembly in the areas ofcriminal law and procedure.

Summary Of Dewey V. State, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 47, Nevada Law Journal

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

No abstract provided.

Statement Of Steven L. Chanenson Before The United States Sentencing Commission Regarding Retroactivity Of Crack Guidelines Amendments, Steven Chanenson

Steven L. Chanenson

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Ryan V. Dist. Ct., 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 42, Katie Maw

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a district court’s order denying petitioner’s motion to substitute counsel.

The Case Of The Crooked Convictions: Erle Stanley Gardner, Perry Mason, And The Court Of Last Resort, Malinda Seymore

Malinda L. Seymore

Race And Recalcitrance: The Miller-El Remands, Sheri Johnson

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In Batson v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court held that a prosecutor may not peremptorily challenge a juror based upon his or her race. Although Baston was decided more than twenty years ago, some lower courts still resist its command. Three recent cases provide particularly egregious examples of that resistance. The Fifth Circuit refused the Supreme Court's instruction in Miller-El v. Cockrell, necessitating a second grant of certiorari in Miller-El v. Dretke. The court then reversed and remanded four lower court cases for reconsideration in light of Miller-El, but in two cases the lower courts have thus …

Summary Of Nay V. State, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 35, Tyler James Watson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a judgment of conviction, upon a jury verdict, of first-degree murder with the use of a deadly weapon and robbery with the use of a deadly weapon.

Summary Of Witherow V. State, Bd. Of Parole Comm’Rs, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 33, Tyler Ure

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This case is an appeal from a district court order dismissing a complaint that challenged a parole board proceeding under Nevada’s Open Meeting Law.‡Ìq

Criminal Law's "Mediating Rules": Balancing, Harmonization, Or Accident?, Michael T. Cahill

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Civil Disobedience And The Necessity Defense, John Alan Cohan

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “This article will first examine the nature of civil disobedience, and distinguish between direct and indirect civil disobedience. Part II highlights some historical examples of civil disobedience. Part IV then examines the principles of the necessity defense, analyzing each of the elements that make up the defense, illustrated with cases on point. Next, Part V will turn to an analysis of several abortion-protest cases that raise issues different from other types of civil disobedience cases. Part VI then will examine Viet Nam era civil disobedience cases. Following that, Part VIII will explore a unique defense known as the Nuremberg …

Fitness For Trial In The District Court: The Legal Perspective, Darius Whelan

Darius Whelan

Summary Of Gallegos V. State, 123 Nev. Advanced Opinion 31, Matthew Engle

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appellant Albert Gallegos was charged under NRS 202.360(1)(b),2 in 2004, with one count of unlawful possession of a firearm after police arrested him at his home in Clark County and found a firearm inside that home. That charge was based on a 1998 felony warrant issued by a California superior court. The California court issued the warrant when Gallegos failed to appear for sentencing after pleading nolo contendere to seven felony charges. At his Nevada trial, Gallegos testified that he did not appear for his sentencing hearing because the California superior court told him when he entered his plea that …

Summary Of State V. Ruscetta, Nev. Adv. Op. No. 32, Krystallin Hernandez

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a district court’s order granting a defendant’s motion to suppress evidence found by a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Officer during a consensual vehicle search.

Introduction To The Third Criminal Procedure Discussion Forum, Russell L. Weaver

San Diego Law Review

The Third Criminal Procedure Discussion Forum was held at the University of Louisville's Brandeis School of Law on December 14, 2006. As with prior fora, the goal of this forum was to bring together a small group of prominent criminal procedure scholars to discuss matters of common interest. This year's forum focused on two topics: "confessions jurisprudence" and "the most underrated criminal procedure decision(s)."

Truth, Justice, And The American Dilemma, Robert Batey

San Diego Law Review

McCleskey v. Kemp is without doubt a memorable case. Professor David C. Baldus and his colleagues, Charles A. Pulaski and George Woodworth, had produced a detailed statistical study of the operation of the death penalty in Georgia showing, in the words of the Supreme Court, that "black defendants, such as McCleskey, who kill white victims have the greatest likelihood of receiving the death penalty." McCleskey used this study to challenge his capital sentence under both the Equal Protection and Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clauses. Like any statistical proof, the Baldus study had been challenged on methodological grounds. The Supreme Court …

Smith V. Hooey: Underrated But Unfulfilled, Leslie W. Abramson

San Diego Law Review

The Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial applies to prosecutions in the federal courts and to state prosecutions through the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. This constitutional right is probably the least favorite of the Bill of Rights, because it would satisfy most defendants if the government never - promptly or otherwise - disposed of their pending charges. One group of persons, though, who may regard the right to a speedy trial as important are convicted defendants currently serving sentences, but who have pending charges brought against them by other states or the federal government. For them, denying the …

The Supreme Court, Confessions, And Judicial Schizophrenia, Arnold H. Loewy

San Diego Law Review

Schizophrenia literally means "split mind." Consequently, it should not be too surprising that the United States Supreme Court, which is a theoretically continuing body with nine ever-changing minds, would say things in one year that seem schizophrenic when contrasted with last year's jurisprudence. Unfortunately, many of the inconsistent statements remain good law, and the result largely depends on which doctrine the Court chooses to trot out. In this essay, four such statements and the extent that each should be taken will seriously be examined.

Interrogating Terrorists: From Miranda Warnings To "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques", Ronald J. Rychlak

San Diego Law Review

An American citizen arrested within the United States would certainly have the right not to incriminate himself. A foreign national arrested outside of the U.S. would presumably not be protected. Other scenarios present more difficult issues. American courts, therefore, have to determine whether the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination applies to non-American citizens, and whether an American police or military agent conducting an investigation abroad must provide some type of warnings before conducting an interrogation. The initial question would seem to be whether terrorist suspects are even entitled to the right protected by Miranda - the right not to incriminate …

Preventing False Confessions: Is Oickle Up To The Task?, Dale R. Ives

San Diego Law Review

In R. v. Oickle, the Supreme Court of Canada expressly stated that the Canadian confessions rule "should recognize which interrogation techniques commonly produce false confessions so as to avoid miscarriages of justice." As a result, the Court reformulated the traditional confessions rule in an attempt to better protect against false confessions. An obvious question is whether the Court succeeded in attaining this goal. An examination of the reformulated rule indicates that, viewed in the abstract and measured against the current state of knowledge on false confessions, the modern rule does offer considerable protection to innocent persons, but it also has …

Privacy As Struggle, Andrew R. Taslitz

San Diego Law Review

The title of this short essay is "Privacy as Struggle," a title meant in part to capture the Court's requirement of superhuman individual efforts to attain secrecy, that is, totally veiling one's activities from the state's prying eyes as an essential prerequisite to the existence of privacy, all too often at the expense of human relationships, interpersonal trust, and political voice. I want, therefore, to paint an apocalyptic vision of the Court's Fourth Amendment privacy jurisprudence, as the reader will no doubt have noticed I have already done in connection with my reading of Hoffa. I want to do so …

Toward A More Robust Right To Counsel Of Choice, Janet C. Hoeffel

San Diego Law Review

This Article takes its lead from the core principles of the right to counsel of choice expressed in Gonzalez-Lopez. These principles indicate that the right should include an indigent defendant's right to continue an attorney-client relationship established at some point in the past, and that, for both nonindigent and indigent defendants, the right to continue a trial with counsel of choice must be honored by trial courts unless it would be unethical or manifestly unjust to do so. This means that trial courts must almost always grant a continuance to accommodate that choice and could rarely deny such a request …