Digital Commons Network^™

Testimony On Oklahoma Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform, Stephen Henderson

Other Faculty Publications

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to you today about Senate Bill 838 and the reform of Oklahoma’s civil asset forfeiture. I am a professor of law at the University of Oklahoma, where my teaching and research focus on criminal law and procedure. I have experience achieving consensus solutions in contested areas of law, most notably in the six years I spent drafting a new set of ABA Criminal Justice Standards, and I know that change is rarely easy. No matter the topic and whatever the status quo, there is sure to be someone who feels it is …

Big Data Blacklisting, Margaret Hu

Faculty Publications

“Big data blacklisting” is the process of categorizing individuals as administratively “guilty until proven innocent” by virtue of suspicious digital data and database screening results. Database screening and digital watchlisting systems are increasingly used to determine who can work, vote, fly, etc. In a big data world, through the deployment of these big data tools, both substantive and procedural due process protections may be threatened in new and nearly invisible ways. Substantive due process rights safeguard fundamental liberty interests. Procedural due process rights prevent arbitrary deprivations by the government of constitutionally protected interests. This Article frames the increasing digital mediation …

Executive Privilege: A Review Of Berger, R. H. Clark

Akron Law Review

RAOUL BERGER HAS ONCE AGAIN placed within a solidly professional framework an issue of considerable public interest and debate. As was the case with impeachment,' Berger's scholarly study on executive privilege brings to the controversy surrounding the issue a much needed analytical construct and massing of evidence which can only result in a greater level of general understanding. Although it is not accurate to suggest that Berger is neutral on the topic, since he published a significant study as far back as 1965 attacking the concept, 2 his method of massing every conceivable argument and piece of evidence on both …

Separation Of Powers; Bill Of Attainder; Presidential Papers; Chief Executive's Right To Privacy; Nixon V. Administrator Of General Services, Patricia L. Spencer

Akron Law Review

In addressing itself to the constitutionality of the "Presidential Recording and Materials Preservation Act," the United States Supreme Court in Nixon v. Administrator of General Services (Nixon II) ruled for the first time on the permissible extent of congressional authority to regulate the disposition of official records and papers of a former chief executive. By its action, the Court undertook to reverse two hundred years of practice by past presidents.

Fools Rush In Where Lawyers Would Better Tread: The Right To Self-Representation And Related Standards Of Competency, Julia M. Capie

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Administrative Inspections: The Loophole In The Fourth Amendment, Ryan Nasim

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pot In My Backyard: Curtilage Concept Endorsed By The Queens Supreme Court To Suppress Physical Evidence Of Marijuana, Laura J. Mulholland

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Access Of News Media To County Jail; Houchins V. Kqed, Inc., Thomas W. Renwand

Akron Law Review

"Although United States history is replete with struggles over the rights and prerogatives of the press, until recently these disputes rarely made their way to the nation's highest court.' In the last several years the Supreme Court has been confronted with a number of important, complex questions dealing with the role of a free press in a free society.'"

The Supreme Court And The Press: Freedom Or Privilege?, Sandra Bradley

Akron Law Review

This comment will examine the Supreme Court's spring, 1978 decisions as they affected first amendment rights, and will assess their impact upon the press. Particular emphasis will be placed on Zurcher v. Stanford Daily as it affects first amendment, as well as fourth amendment, protections.

The Role Of Courts In Government Today, James L. Oakes

Akron Law Review

It is elementary constitutional law that American courts have the power of judicial review. While a case can be made (and is still sometimes made by critics of too much judicial intervention) against the courts' power to review federal actions against the Constitution or state actions contrary to the Federal Constitution or statutes, the principle of judicial review is so well ingrained in the American system that it need not be reargued here. Rather I shall examine the principal arguments counseling caution and restraint in the exercise of the power, even though some of these arguments seem to run against …

Sixth Amendment; Right To Counsel; Use Of Prior Uncounseled Convictions; Lewis V. United States And Baldasar V. Illinois, Rita Marks

Akron Law Review

Once again the Supreme Court has spoken on the issue of the right to counsel. Within three months the Court rendered two decisions which appear to be inconsistent, not only with one another, but with prior decisions of the Court

Fifth Amendment, Double Jeopardy In Capital Sentencing, Bullington V. Missouri, Patrick J. Keating

Akron Law Review

In Bullington v. Missouri the Supreme Court marked a significant departure from previous principles of double jeopardy. The Court, for the first time, applied the Double Jeopardy clause to a criminal sentence. By prohibiting the state from seeking the death penalty at retrial, the case also casts important implications on capital punishment.

The Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel Quandry: The Debate Continues Strickland V. Washington, Susan K. Vanburen

Akron Law Review

In recent years, dissatisfied criminal defendants have increasingly resorted to claims alleging actual ineffectiveness of counsel as a vehicle for challenging their convictions. Prior to Strickland v. Washington, the Supreme Court had not delineated the "proper standards" for reviewing claims of actual ineffectiveness of counsel. The lack of a national standard for assessing defense counsel's performance, as it relates to the constitutional requirement, generated extensive deliberation by lower courts and commentators. Faced with a deluge of actual ineffectiveness claims, the lower courts were forced to formulate standards to distinguish effective from ineffective assistance. However, the ensuing diverse standards employed …

Escobedo And Miranda Revisited, Arthur J. Goldberg

Akron Law Review

Shortly before the close of the 1983 term, the Supreme Court of the United States decided two cases, U.S. v. Gouveia and New York v. Quarles, which in effect overruled Escobedo v. Illinois and undermined Miranda v. Arizona.

Wiggins V. State: Receiving A Fair Trial Under The Specter Of Aids, Charles Zamora

Akron Law Review

Wiggins v. State presented two unique issues: (1) whether it was proper to authorize courtroom security personnel to use prophylactic apparel while escorting a defendant merely suspected of having acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), and (2) the extent to which this handling procedure impacted the jury.

This Note will analyze the Wiggins decision, emphasizing the court's reasoning as it pertains to the following: (1) the guarantee of a fair and impartial jury trial for defendants either having or being suspected of having AIDS; (2) the permissible exercise of discretion by the trial judge in authorizing precautions during the course of the …

Mill's Theory Of Liberty In Constitutional Interpretation, Wilson Ray Huhn

Akron Law Review

I wish to apply Justice Thompson's discussion of the nature of liberty in a more general context in addressing fundamental questions of constitutional interpretation. Justice Thompson's essential inquiry is, "Should the enforcement of morals be the concern of the law?" I take the liberty of slightly rephrasing that question: "Is the enforcement of traditional moral norms per se constitutional?" I suggest that the answer to this question is "no." Courts and scholars have often confused our moral traditions with our traditions of liberty and equality. My central premise is that it is for the legislature to enact morality into law, …

Holland V. Illinois: Sixth Amendment Fair Cross-Section Requirement Does Not Preclude Racially-Based Peremptory Challenges, Debra L. Dippel

Akron Law Review

This note recaps the Supreme Court's previous decisions regarding defendant's objections to jury composition, including both equal protection and fair cross-section requirement analyses. It also discusses Holland, examines the various opinions in the case, and reviews the arguments for and against abolishing peremptory challenges. Finally, the note proposes a solution for the questions which Holland leaves unanswered.

Mu'min V. Virginia: Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments Do Not Compel Content Questions In Assessing Juror Impartiality, Cheryl A. Waddle

Akron Law Review

This note synopsizes the Supreme Court's prior decisions regarding the adequacy of voir dire in capital cases surrounded by prejudicial pretrial publicity. This note will then discuss Mu'Min and explore the weaknesses in the Court's analogies to its prior decisions. Next, the note will propose arguments in favor of mandating content questioning. Finally, this note will explore possible nonconstitutional reasons for requiring content questioning in cases where juror partiality should be presumed.

Another Casualty Of The War . . . Vagrancy Laws Target The Fourth Amendment, T. Leigh Anenson

Akron Law Review

This Comment will review the origins of the vagrancy law and its traditional abuses. It will then examine decisions discussing the vagrancy law's constitutionality under the Due Process clause void-for-vagueness doctrine and the courts' attempted remedy of explicit standards as to place, scope, or purpose. The remainder of this Comment will discuss the constitutionality of these revised vagrancy laws under the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable seizures.

The Shift Of The Balance Of Advantage In Criminal Litigation: The Case Of Mr. Simpson, David Robinson Jr.

Akron Law Review

The intense public interest in the extraordinary trial and acquittal of Mr. O.J. Simpson provides an appropriate occasion to look at the criminal justice system more generally, to note where we have been in the balance of advantage between prosecution and defense, where we are now, and where, perhaps, we should be.

In Re: Grand Jury Proceedings: The Semantics Of "Presumption" And "Need", James M. Popson

Akron Law Review

This note analyzes the District Court of the District of Columbia’s application of the doctrine of executive privilege in In re Grand Jury Proceedings. Part II provides a brief history of executive privilege and discusses precedents that impacted the court’s decision. Part III indicates the procedural posture of the case and sets forth the substantive facts. Part IV discusses the court’s analysis of the executive privilege issue in light of recent District of Columbia Circuit Court decisions. Part V concludes that In re Grand Jury Proceedings bolstered the notion of a presumption in favor of the privilege, while observing that …

Teaching Slavery In American Constitutional Law, Paul Finkelman

Akron Law Review

From 1787 until the Civil War, slavery was probably the single most important economic institution in the United States. On the eve of the Civil War, slave property was worth at least two billion dollars. In the aggregate, the value of all the slaves in the United States exceeded the total value of all the nations railroads or all its factories. Slavery led to two major political compromises of the antebellum period, as well as to the most politically divisive Supreme Court decision in our history. Vast amounts of political and legal energy went into dealing with the institution. It …

Teaching Free Speech From An Incomplete Fossil Record, Michael Kent Curtis

Akron Law Review

The second part of this symposium has been devoted to how we teach the Constitution. It has emphasized what gets left out. The reader will see a pattern. Paul Finkelman is a leading scholar on the law of slavery and the Constitution. Paul thinks – and I believe he is correct – that the immense influence of slavery on American constitutional law is too often neglected in our constitutional law courses. James Wilson has studied how political philosophers – Aristotle, Rousseau, James Harrington, and others – have understood the distribution of wealth as a central factor affecting how the constitution …

The Constitutional Politics Of Interpreting Section 5 Of The Fourteenth Amendment, Christopher P. Banks

Akron Law Review

This essay analyzes the Rehnquist Court’s Section 5 cases by first, in Section I, establishing how the Supreme Court has historically assumed the task of interpreting Congress’ power to act under the Fourteenth Amendment. Two periods, Reconstruction and then the mid- 1960s, are examined because they present contrasting views about the scope of what the Fourteenth Amendment and its enforcement section means. Section II then surveys Section 5 cases from the Rehnquist Court in order to illustrate how its jurisprudence mirrors the antifederalist rhetoric established in the post-reconstruction era while, not surprisingly, departing from the principles set forth in the …

Barefoot In Quicksand: The Future Of "Future Dangerousness" Predictions In Death Penalty Sentencing In The World Of Daubert And Kumho, Thomas Regnier

Akron Law Review

To understand the Barefoot decision, it is necessary to examine Jurek v. Texas, an earlier case in which the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of using predictions of future dangerousness as an element in capital sentencing. I will begin by analyzing the background to Barefoot, and then the Barefoot case itself. I will consider how admissibility of future dangerousness testimony in capital cases may or may not have changed after the Supreme Court’s decisions in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals and Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael. I will argue that future dangerousness predictions in capital cases are an unconstitutional due …

Ashcroft V. Free Speech Coalition: Can We Roast The Pig Without Burning Down The House In Regulating "Virtual" Child Pornography?, Ryan P. Kennedy

Akron Law Review

This Note will explore the struggle in the area of child pornography between the state’s legitimate interest in the protection of children and the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech. Part II provides a brief history of the free speech doctrine as related to the area of child pornography prevention. Part III discusses the circuit split, as well as the facts, procedural history, and the holding of the Supreme Court. Finally, Part IV will examine the effect of the Court’s interpretation of the statute as unconstitutional, explain why the decision was correct, and look at Congress’ recent efforts at new …

Ratios, (Ir)Rationality & Civil Rights Punitive Awards, Caprice L. Roberts

Akron Law Review

This article will focus on the effect of the Court’s tightening of the ratio prong on federal civil rights cases. In particular, it addresses whether federal appellate courts feel constrained by State Farm’s stated preference for single-digit ratios, or instead, jettison the ratio strictures in favor of other prongs...The problems are two-fold in civil rights line of cases: (1) some federal circuit courts bar punitive damages if there are no compensatory damages; and (2) courts reviewing a punitive award where compensatory damages exist may feel compelled to apply rigidly a single-digit ratio to comport with State Farm. Barring or severely …

Obama, The Fourteenth Amendment, And The Drug War, Martin D. Carcieri

Akron Law Review

This article is written to help clarify the full range of understanding Obama would bring to a second term.

Specifically, I defend two related, contested theses. My core thesis, to which this article is primarily devoted, is a jurisprudential claim: contrary to state and lower federal court rulings, marijuana prohibition is subject to strict judicial scrutiny under leading relevant U.S. Supreme Court jurisprudence. I support this thesis primarily by showing that under the Fourteenth Amendment, bodily autonomy—i.e., the control over the borders and contents of one’s body burdened by laws like marijuana prohibition—is a fundamental right, and that the Court …

The Prioritization Of Criminal Over Civil Counsel And The Discounted Danger Of Private Power, Kathryn A. Sabbeth

Florida State University Law Review

This Article seeks to make two contributions to the literature on the role of counsel. First, it brings together civil Gideon research and recent studies of collateral consequences. Like criminal convictions, civil judgments result in far-reaching collateral consequences, and these should be included in any evaluation of the private interests that civil lawyers protect. Second, this Article argues that the prioritization of criminal defense counsel over civil counsel reflects a mistaken view of lawyers’ primary role as a shield against government power. Lawyers also serve a vital role in checking the power of private actors. As private actors increasingly take …

Choice Of Counsel And The Appearance Of Equal Justice Under Law, Wesley M. Oliver

Northwestern University Law Review

Once a federal prosecutor obtains an indictment that seeks a forfeiture, a judge must permit the prosecutor to freeze all the potentially forfeitable assets that would be unavailable at the time of conviction. Obviously, funds used for the defense would fit into that category. Equally obvious is the tension between the government’s interest in assets that may be forfeitable and a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to choice of counsel. A number of lower courts therefore had permitted defendants to seek release of the assets needed for a defense by challenging the grand jury’s determination that probable cause existed to believe …