Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Prisoner's Rights And The Correctional Scheme: The Legal Controversy And Problems Of Implementation - A Symposium - Introduction, Donald W. Dowd

Donald W. Dowd

No abstract provided.

Moving Beyond Miranda: Concessions For Confessions, Scott Howe

Scott W. Howe

Abstract: The law governing police interrogation provides perverse incentives. For criminal suspects, the law rewards obstruction and concealment. For police officers, it honors deceit and psychological aggression. For the courts and the rest of us, it encourages blindness and rationalization. This Article contends that the law could help foster better behaviors. The law could incentivize criminals to confess without police trickery and oppression. It could motivate police officers involved in obtaining suspect statements to avoid chicanery and duress. And, it could summon courts and the rest of us to speak more truthfully about whether suspect admissions are the product of …

Double Jeopardy, The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, And The Subsequent-Prosecution Dilemma, Elizabeth T. Lear

Elizabeth T Lear

The choice to embrace a real-offense regime probably constitutes the single most controversial decision made by the Federal Sentencing Commission in drafting the Federal Sentencing Guidelines ("Guidelines"). Real-offense sentencing bases punishment on a defendant's actual conduct as opposed to the offense of conviction. The Guidelines sweep a variety of factors into the sentencing inquiry, including criminal offenses for which no conviction has been obtained. Under the Guidelines, therefore, prosecutorial charging decisions and even verdicts of acquittal after jury trial may have little impact at sentencing.

Long before the adoption of the Guidelines, courts bent on rationalizing the real-offense regime devised …

Brief Of Amici Curiae -- Heien V. State Of North Carolina, Charles E. Maclean, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

Reasonable suspicion of unlawful activity cannot be predicated on conduct that does not violate the law. Put differently, if reasonableness — or reasonable suspicion — is to mean anything, it means that apparent violations of the law must be based on actual violations of the law. The North Carolina Supreme Court’s decision sends a message to drivers throughout the country that they cannot be wrong about what the law requires, even where law enforcement is wrong — dead wrong — about what the law proscribes.

Neurotechnologies At The Intersection Of Criminal Procedure And Constitutional Law, Amanda C. Pustilnik

Amanda C Pustilnik

The rapid development of neurotechnologies poses novel constitutional issues for criminal law and criminal procedure. These technologies can identify directly from brain waves whether a person is familiar with a stimulus like a face or a weapon, can model blood flow in the brain to indicate whether a person is lying, and can even interfere with brain processes themselves via high-powered magnets to cause a person to be less likely to lie to an investigator. These technologies implicate the constitutional privilege against compelled, self-incriminating speech under the Fifth Amendment and the right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure …

Criminal Innovation And The Warrant Requirement: Reconsidering The Rights-Police Efficiency Trade-Off, Tonja Jacobi, Jonah Kind

Tonja Jacobi

It is routinely assumed that there is a trade-off between police efficiency and the warrant requirement. But existing analysis ignores the interaction between police investigative practices and criminal innovation. Narrowing the definition of a search or otherwise limiting the requirement for a warrant gives criminals greater incentive to innovate to avoid detection. With limited police resources to develop countermeasures, police will often be just as effective at capturing criminals when facing higher Fourth Amendment hurdles. We provide a game theoretic model that shows that when police investigation and criminal innovation are considered in a dynamic context, the police efficiency rationale …

Amicus Brief -- Freddie Lee Hall V. State Of Florida, Adam Lamparello, Charles Maclean

Adam Lamparello

IQ cutoffs violate the Constitution. In Atkins v. Virginia, the United States Supreme Court recognized three distinct components to intellectual disability: (1) an intelligence quotient; (2) deficits in adaptive functioning; and (3) onset prior to eighteen. The Florida Supreme Court interpreted Fla. Stat. § 921.137(1) to bar evidence of adaptive disability and early onset if a defendant scored above a 70 on an IQ test. As Justice Perry recognized in his partial dissent, that interpretation will lead to the execution of a retarded man. The Amicus brief argues that the Florida Supreme Court's decision should be reversed because it prohibits …

The Voice Of Reason—Why Recent Judicial Interpretations Of The Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act’S Restrictions On Habeas Corpus Are Wrong, Judith L. Ritter

Judith L Ritter

By filing a petition for a federal writ of habeas corpus, a prisoner initiates a legal proceeding collateral to the direct appeals process. Federal statutes set forth the procedure and parameters of habeas corpus review. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) first signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, included significant cut-backs in the availability of federal writs of habeas corpus. This was by congressional design. Yet, despite the dire predictions, for most of the first decade of AEDPA’s reign, the door to habeas relief remained open. More recently, however, the Supreme Court reinterpreted a key portion …

Beyond Breard, Erik G. Luna, Douglas J. Sylvester

Erik Luna

No abstract provided.

Amicus Brief: State V. Glover (Maine Supreme Judicial Court), Adam Lamparello, Charles Maclean

Adam Lamparello

When law enforcement seeks to obtain a warrantless, pre-arrest DNA sample from an individual, that individual has the right to say “No.” If silence is to become a “badge of guilt,” then the right to silence—under the United States and Maine Constitutions—might become a thing of the past. Allowing jurors to infer consciousness of guilt from a pre-arrest DNA sample violates the Fourth Amendment to the United States and Maine Constitutions.

Psychopathy And Sentencing, Erik Luna

Erik Luna

No abstract provided.

The Right To Quantitative Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron

Danielle Keats Citron

We are at the cusp of a historic shift in our conceptions of the Fourth Amendment driven by dramatic advances in surveillance technology. Governments and their private sector agents continue to invest billions of dollars in massive data-mining projects, advanced analytics, fusion centers, and aerial drones, all without serious consideration of the constitutional issues that these technologies raise. In United States v. Jones, the Supreme Court signaled an end to its silent acquiescence in this expanding surveillance state. In that case, five justices signed concurring opinions defending a revolutionary proposition: that citizens have Fourth Amendment interests in substantial quantities of …

Robinson V. California: From Revolutionary Constitutional Doctrine To Model Ban On Status Crimes, Erik Luna

Erik Luna

No abstract provided.

The Prosecutor In Transnational Perspective, Erik Luna, Marianne Wade

Erik Luna

No abstract provided.

Massachusetts Firearms Prosecutions In The Wake Of Melendez-Diaz, Kevin P. Chapman

Kevin P. Chapman

The Supreme Court ruling in Melendez-Diaz fundamentally changed the way that firearms offenses are prosecuted in Massachusetts. This paper presents the history of firearms prosecutions and the current state of the law, and it raises several unanswered questions that could further change the nature of future firearms prosecutions.

"Bad Juror" Lists And The Prosecutor's Duty To Disclose, Ira P. Robbins

Ira P. Robbins

Establishing Guidelines For Attorney Representation Of Criminal Defendants At The Sentencing Phase Of Capital Trials, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

No abstract provided.

Hydraulic Pressures And Slight Deviations, Erik Luna

Erik Luna

No abstract provided.

In Support Of Restorative Justice And Reply, Erik Luna

Erik Luna

No abstract provided.

Drugs And Justice, Erik Luna, Margaret Battin

Erik Luna

No abstract provided.

La Justicia Restorativa: Un Modela De Penas Alternativas, Erik Luna

Erik Luna

No abstract provided.

Child Testimony Via Two-Way Closed Circuit Television: A New Perspective On Maryland V. Craig In United States V. Turning Bear And United States V. Bordeaux, Aaron R. Harmon

Aaron R. Harmon

Published as “Child Testimony via Two-Way Closed Circuit Television: A New Perspective on Maryland v. Craig in United States v. Turning Bear and United States v. Bordeaux,” 7 N.C. J.L. & Tech. 157 (Fall 2005). For Confrontation Clause purposes, child testimony by two-way closed circuit television is substantively different from one-way closed circuit television. Two-way closed circuit testimony is preferable because it more closely approximates face-to-face confrontation. The Supreme Court’s case-specific holding in Maryland v. Craig was directed at one-way closed circuit testimony. As such, the Eighth Circuit was mistaken in conflating the two forms of testimony when it relied …

Subsidiarity, Federalism, And Federal Prosecution Of Street Crime, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

No abstract provided.

Overextending The Criminal Law And Misguided Guidelines, Erik Luna

Erik Luna

No abstract provided.

Without Charge: Assessing The Due Process Rights Of Unindicted Co-Conspirators, Ira P. Robbins

Ira P. Robbins

Magistrate Judges, Article Iii, And The Power To Preside Over Federal Prisoner Section 2255 Proceedings, Ira P. Robbins

Ira P. Robbins

The Revitalization Of The Common-Law Civil Writ Of Audita Querela As A Post-Conviction Remedy In Criminal Cases: The Immigration Context And Beyond, Ira P. Robbins

Ira P. Robbins