Criminal Procedure Commons^™

The Automated Fourth Amendment, Maneka Sinha

Faculty Scholarship

Courts routinely defer to police officer judgments in reasonable suspicion and probable cause determinations. Increasingly, though, police officers outsource these threshold judgments to new forms of technology that purport to predict and detect crime and identify those responsible. These policing technologies automate core police determinations about whether crime is occurring and who is responsible. Criminal procedure doctrine has failed to insist on some level of scrutiny of—or skepticism about—the reliability of this technology. Through an original study analyzing numerous state and federal court opinions, this Article exposes the implications of law enforcement’s reliance on these practices given the weighty interests …

Against Criminal Law Localism, Brenner M. Fissell

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Clamping Down On Faulty Forensics, Maneka Sinha

Maryland Carey Law

No abstract provided.

Junk Science At Sentencing, Maneka Sinha

Faculty Scholarship

Junk science used in criminal trials has contributed to hundreds of wrongful convictions. But the problem is much worse than that. Junk science does not only harm criminal defendants who go to trial, but also the overwhelming majority of defendants—over ninety-five percent—who plead guilty, skip trial, and proceed straight to sentencing.

Scientific, technical, and other specialized evidence (“STS evidence”) is used regularly, and with increasing frequency, at sentencing. Despite this, Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and its state equivalents—which help filter unreliable STS evidence at trials—do not apply at the critical sentencing stage. In fact, at sentencing, no meaningful admissibility …

Criminalization And Normalization: Some Thoughts About Offenders With Serious Mental Illness, Richard C. Boldt

Faculty Scholarship

Response to Professor E. Lea Johnston, Reconceptualizing Criminal Justice Reform for Offenders with Serious Mental Illness

Abstract

While Professor Johnston is persuasive that clinical factors such as diagnosis and treatment history are not, in most cases, predictive by themselves of criminal behavior, her concession that those clinical factors are associated with a constellation of risks and needs that are predictive of criminal system involvement complicates her efforts to maintain a clear boundary between the criminalization theory and the normalization thesis. Indeed, Professor Johnston’s article contains a brief section in which she identifies “possible justifications” for the specialized programs that are …

Releasing Older Prisoners Convicted Of Violent Crimes: The Unger Story, Michael Millemann, Jennifer Elisa Chapman, Samuel P. Feder

University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class

No abstract provided.

Teaching Professional Responsibility Through Theater, Michael Millemann, Elliott Rauh, Robert Bowie Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

This article is about ethics-focused, law school courses, co-taught with a theater director, in which students wrote, produced and performed in plays. The plays were about four men who, separately, were wrongfully convicted, spent decades in prison, and finally were released and exonerated, formally (two) or informally (two).

The common themes in these miscarriages of justice were that 1) unethical conduct of prosecutors (especially failures to disclose exculpatory evidence) and of defense counsel (especially incompetent representation) undermined the Rule of Law and produced wrongful convictions, and 2) conversely, that the ethical conduct of post-conviction lawyers and law students helped to …

Race Decriminalization And Criminal Legal System Reform, Michael Pinard

Faculty Scholarship

There is emerging consensus that various components of the criminal legal system have gone too far in capturing and punishing masses of Black men, women, and children. This evolving recognition has helped propel important and pathbreaking criminal legal reforms in recent years, with significant bipartisan support. These reforms have targeted the criminal legal system itself. They strive to address the pain inflicted by the system. However, by concerning themselves solely with the criminal legal system, these reforms do not confront the reality that Black men, women, and children will continue to be devastatingly overrepresented in each stitch of the system. …

State V. Thomas: An Improper Extension Of Involuntary Manslaughter To Combat The Opioid Epidemic, Daniel P. Mooney

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Maryland Makes New Evidence Postconviction Review Provisions Available To Defendants With Plea Deals, Felicia Langel

Maryland Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

Class V. United States: An Imperfect Application Of The Menna-Blackledge Doctrine To Post-Guilty Plea Constitutional Claims, Nikolaus Albright

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Digging Them Out Alive, Michael Millemann, Rebecca Bowman Rivas, Elizabeth Smith

Faculty Scholarship

From 2013-2018, we taught a collection of interrelated law and social work clinical courses, which we call “the Unger clinic.” This clinic was part of a major, multi-year criminal justice project, led by the Maryland Office of the Public Defender. The clinic and project responded to a need created by a 2012 Maryland Court of Appeals decision, Unger v. State. It, as later clarified, required that all Maryland prisoners who were convicted by juries before 1981—237 older, long-incarcerated prisoners—be given new trials. This was because prior to 1981 Maryland judges in criminal trials were required to instruct the jury …

Parallel Enforcement And Agency Interdependence, Anthony O'Rourke

Maryland Law Review

Parallel civil and criminal enforcement dominates public enforcement of everything from securities regulation to immigration control. The scholarship, however, lacks any structural analysis of how parallel enforcement differs from other types of inter-agency coordination. Drawing on original interviews with prosecutors, regulators, and white-collar defense attorneys, this Article is the first to provide a realistic presentation of how parallel enforcement works in practice. It builds on this descriptive account to offer an explanatory theory of the pressures and incentives that shape parallel enforcement. The Article shows that, in parallel proceedings, criminal prosecutors lack the gatekeeping monopoly that traditionally defines their relationships …

Do Muddy Waters Shift Burdens?, Carrie Sperling, Kimberly Holst

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Appellant, Abdullah Malik Joppy A/K/A Richard Joppy V. State Of Maryland, No. 533, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Peter Honnef

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Appellant, Davon Jones V. State Of Maryland, No. 547, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Matthew T. Healy

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Appellant, Matthew Bredlow V. State Of Maryland, No. 621, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Ardalun Kamali

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Appellant, John Hill V. State Of Maryland, No. 2740, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Silva Georgian

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Appellant, James Goss V. State Of Maryland, No. 669, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Lisa M. Johnson

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Muscle Memory And The Local Concentration Of Capital Punishment, Lee B. Kovarsky

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Cruel And Unusual Before And After 2012: Miller V. Alabama Must Apply Retroactively, Tracy A. Rhodes

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Burris V. State: Suggestions For The Continued Development Of The Rule For Admitting The Testimony Of Gang Experts, Michael Jacko

Maryland Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

Victim Or Thug? Examining The Relevance Of Stories In Cases Involving Shootings Of Unarmed Black Males, Sherri Keene

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Poor, Black And "Wanted": Criminal Justice In Ferguson And Baltimore, Michael Pinard

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Maryland Access To Justice Story: Indigent Defendants’ Right To Counsel At First Appearance, Douglas L. Colbert

University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class

No abstract provided.

Youth Charged As Adults: The Use And Outcomes Of Transfer In Baltimore City, Jason R. Tashea, Al Passarella

University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class

No abstract provided.

You Can't Handle The Truth! Trial Juries And Credibility, Renée M. Hutchins

Faculty Scholarship

Every now and again, we get a look, usually no more than a glimpse, at how the justice system really works. What we see—before the sanitizing curtain is drawn abruptly down—is a process full of human fallibility and error, sometimes noble, more often unfair, rarely evil but frequently unequal.

The central question, vital to our adjudicative model, is: How well can we expect a jury to determine credibility through the ordinary adversary processes of live testimony and vigorous impeachment? The answer, from all I have been able to see is: not very well.

Kaley V. United States: Sanctifying Grand Jury Determinations And Marginalizing The Right To Counsel Of Choice, Laura Merkey

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Compulsory Dna Collection And A Juvenile's Best Interests, Kevin Lapp

University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class

No abstract provided.

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

Faculty Scholarship

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 …