Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Credibility assessments (1)
- Exculpatory testimony (1)
- Federal sentencing (1)
- Habeas corpus (1)
- Incentives (1)
-
- Inculpatory testimony (1)
- Ineffective assistance of counsel (1)
- Information costs (1)
- Jeremy Bentham (1)
- Juror misconduct (1)
- Jury selection (1)
- Post-conviction proceedings (1)
- Public choice insight (1)
- Racial discrimination (1)
- Reasonableness (1)
- Sentencing commission (1)
- Sentencing guidelines (1)
- Social optimality (1)
- Voir dire (1)
- Witness testimony (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Judges
The Color Of Truth: Race And The Assessment Of Credibility, Sheri Lynn Johnson
The Color Of Truth: Race And The Assessment Of Credibility, Sheri Lynn Johnson
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Quality Of Mercy Must Be Restrained, And Other Lessons In Learning To Love The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Frank O. Bowman Iii
Quality Of Mercy Must Be Restrained, And Other Lessons In Learning To Love The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Frank O. Bowman Iii
Faculty Publications
In the remarks that follow, I do four things. First, for those unfamiliar with the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, I begin by explaining briefly how the Guidelines work. Second, I endeavor to show why Judge Cabranes is wrong, absolutely wrong in declaring the Guidelines a failure, and mostly wrong in the specific criticisms he and others level against the Guidelines. Third, after jousting with Judge Cabranes a bit, I discuss some problems with the current federal sentencing system, most notably the sheer length of narcotics sentences. Finally, I comment briefly on some of the implications of the Guidelines, and the principles …
Mistake Of Federal Criminal Law: A Study Of Coaltions And Costly Information, Erin O'Hara O'Connor, Richard S. Murphy
Mistake Of Federal Criminal Law: A Study Of Coaltions And Costly Information, Erin O'Hara O'Connor, Richard S. Murphy
Scholarly Publications
This article analyzes Supreme Court and other federal court cases, to explain the seemingly disparate incorporation of mistake of law excuses into federal criminal statutes. Most of the cases can be explained from an information cost perspective. If an easily separable subset of the regulated population cannot be induced to learn their legal obligations given credibly low prior probabilities and high information costs, they are excused from criminal liability. Moreover, when criminal statutes are vulnerable to constituent protest, courts require that enforcers increase awareness of the law through information subsidies rather than convicting the ignorant. At least with mistake of …