Criminal Procedure Commons^™

"Send Freedom House!": A Study In Police Abolition, Tiffany Yang

Washington Law Review

Sparked by the police killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, the 2020 uprisings accelerated a momentum of abolitionist organizing that demands the defunding and dismantling of policing infrastructures. Although a growing body of legal scholarship recognizes abolitionist frameworks when examining conventional proposals for reform, critics mistakenly continue to disregard police abolition as an unrealistic solution. This Essay helps dispel this myth of “impracticality” and illustrates the pragmatism of abolition by identifying a community-driven effort that achieved a meaningful reduction in policing we now take for granted. I detail the history of the Freedom House Ambulance Service, a Black civilian …

Can A Person's "Slate" Ever Really Be "Cleaned"? The Modern-Day Implications Of Pennsylvania's Clean Slate Act, Kimberly E. Capuder

St. John's Law Review

(Exceprt)

In 2006, Khalia was arrested for a “low-level counterfeiting charge.” While Khalia was innocent and never convicted for the charged offense, she still had a criminal record. Because she was concerned that future employers would “view her as a thief,” she never applied to any of her dream jobs. But once Khalia’s arrest record was automatically sealed, she finally had enough confidence to send in a job application to a prestigious consulting firm, and was offered the position. Khalia believes that her newly sealed criminal record “means a future without judgment.” And this future without judgment was made possible …

Mirror, Mirror, On The Wall—Biased Impartiality, Appearances, And The Need For Recusal Reform, Zygmont A. Pines

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The article focuses on a troubling aspect of contemporary judicial morality.

Impartiality—and the appearance of impartiality—are the foundation of judicial decision-making, judicial morality, and the public’s trust in the rule of law. Recusal, in which a jurist voluntarily removes himself or herself from participating in a case, is a process that attempts to preserve and promote the substance and the appearance of judicial impartiality. Nevertheless, the traditional common law recusal process, prevalent in many of our state court systems, manifestly subverts basic legal and ethical norms.

Today’s recusal practice—whether rooted in unintentional hypocrisy, wishful thinking, or a pathological cognitive dissonance— …

Dirty Johns: Prosecuting Prostituted Women In Pennsylvania And The Need For Reform, Mckay Lewis

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Prostitution is as old as human civilization itself. Throughout history, public attitudes toward prostituted women have varied greatly. But adverse consequences of the practice—usually imposed by men purchasing sexual services—have continuously been present. Prostituted women have regularly been subject to violence, discrimination, and indifference from their clients, the general public, and even law enforcement and judicial officers.

Jurisdictions can choose to adopt one of three general approaches to prostitution regulation: (1) criminalization; (2) legalization/ decriminalization; or (3) a hybrid approach known as the Nordic Model. Criminalization regimes are regularly associated with disparate treatment between prostituted women and their clients, high …

Seizing Family Homes From The Innocent: Can The Eighth Amendment Protect Minorities And The Poor From Excessive Punishment In Civil Forfeiture?, Louis S. Rulli

All Faculty Scholarship

Civil forfeiture laws permit the government to seize and forfeit private property that has allegedly facilitated a crime without ever charging the owner with any criminal offense. The government extracts payment in kind—property—and gives nothing to the owner in return, based upon a legal fiction that the property has done wrong. As such, the government’s taking of property through civil forfeiture is punitive in nature and constrained by the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause, which is intended to curb abusive punishments.

The Supreme Court’s failure to announce a definitive test for determining the constitutional excessiveness of civil forfeiture takings under …

Officiating Removal, Leah Litman

Articles

For the last several years, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has quietly attempted to curtail capital defendants' representation in state postconviction proceedings. In 2011, various justices on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court began to call for federally funded community defender organizations to stop representing capital defendants in state postconviction proceedings. The justices argued, among other things, that the organizations' representation of capital defendants constituted impermissible federal interference with state governmental processes and burdened state judicial resources. The court also alleged the community defender organizations were in violation of federal statutes, which only authorized the organizations to assist state prisoners in federal, but …

Dying To Win, Andrea Lyon

Andrea D. Lyon

No abstract provided.

He Said, She Said: Why Pennsylvania Should Adopt Federal Rules Of Evidence 413 And 414, Jessica D. Khan

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Interests And Politics In Sentencing Reform: The Development Of Sentencing Guidelines In Minnesota And Pennsylvania, Susan E. Martin

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Courts--Rule 33 Of Rules Of Criminal Procedure--Power To Grant A New Trial After Affirmance, Irving Slifkin S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

One John Memolo was convicted of tax evasion in the District Court of the United States for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The defendant's motion for a new trial, on the ground of prejudicial conduct of the trial judge, was denied. He then appealed assigning as error all of the grounds stated in his motion and also the denial of the motion for a new trial. The circuit court of appeals affirmed the conviction. The sentence was executed and the defendant imprisoned in a federal penitentiary. Then the district judge reconsidered, and in the interest of justice directed that the …

Crimes--Burden Of Proving Alibi And Self-Defense

Michigan Law Review

The defendant, indicted for murder, requested a charge that, if the evidence as to self-defense raised in the minds of the jurors a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the defendant, they should acquit him. Held, the trial court properly refused to· give the instruction. The burden was on the defendant to establish the defense by a preponderance of the evidence. Commonwealth v. Troup (Pa. 1931) 153 Atl. 337.