Digital Commons Network^™

Supermajoritarianism And The American Criminal Jury, Ethan J. Leib

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

In Apodaca v. Oregon and Johnson v. Louisiana, the Supreme Court allowed the relaxation of the decision rule most commonly associated with criminal jury felony verdicts and held that unanimity in state criminal cases is not constitutionally required. The Court announced that states were allowed to use 10-2 and 9-3 verdicts in non-capital state cases in contravention of the traditional rule requiring unanimity. The Court argued that the essential function of the jury is to place between the accused and the state a commonsense group of laymen representing a cross-section of the community-and that relaxation of the unanimity requirement would …

Fighting Terrorism And Preserving Civil Liberties, James B. Comey

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Can You Hear Me Now?": Expectations Of Privacy, False Friends, And The Perils Of Speaking Under The Supreme Court's Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Donald L. Doernberg

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Part I of this article offers a brief history of the development of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence and the Court's articulation and application of what has come to be known as the exclusionary rule, which forbids some (but not all) government use of evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Part II focuses on the false-friend cases, elaborating the Court's reasoning and showing why, although the most famous cases involve varying kinds of activity from electronic recording to eavesdropping to simple reporting of the false friend's observation, the Court's method has united these cases under a single analytical rubric. Part …

Mapp V. Ohio: The First Shot Fired In The Warren Court's Criminal Procedure 'Revolution', Yale Kamisar

Book Chapters

Although Earl Warren ascended to the Supreme Court in 1953, when we speak of the Warren Court's "revolution" in American criminal procedure we really mean the movement that got underway half-way through the Chief Justice's sixteen-year reign. It was the 1961 case of Mapp v. Ohio, overruling Wolf v. Colorado and holding that the state courts had to exclude illegally seized evidence as a matter of federal constitutional law, that is generally regarded as having launched the so-called criminal procedure revolution.

Why People Who Face Losing Their Homes In Legal Proceedings Must Have A Right To Counsel, Andrew Scherer

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article advocates for the establishment of a right to counsel for individuals facing eviction in New York City's Housing Court, arguing that such a right is essential for fair legal proceedings, aligns with constitutional principles of due process and equal protection, and is cost-effective in preventing homelessness and reducing societal costs. The author emphasizes that the current system disproportionately disadvantages low-income tenants, who often lack legal representation, and draws on international precedents where such rights are recognized.

Reflections On Brady V. Maryland, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Part I of this Article describes the evolution of the Brady rule over the past forty-three years. Part I sketches the origins of the rule and its doctrinal developments. Part II closely examines Brady's impact on constitutional criminal procedure. Part II suggests that Brady's essential goal has been eroded by the courts, subverted by prosecutors, and ignored by disciplinary bodies. Part III proposes that only through expanding a defendant's right to discovery can the goal of Brady be realized. The Article concludes that Brady, more than any other rule of constitutional criminal procedure, has been the most fertile and widespread …

Manson V. Brathwaite Revisited: Towards A New Rule Of Decision For Due Process Challenges To Eyewitness Identification Procedures, Timothy P. O'Toole, Giovanna Shay

Faculty Scholarship

Almost 30 years ago, in Manson v. Brathwaite--the Supreme Court set out a test for determining when due process requires suppression of an out-of-court identification produced by suggestive police procedures. The Manson Court rejected a per se exclusion rule in favor of a test focusing on whether an identification infected by suggestive procedures is nonetheless reliable when judged in the totality of the circumstances. The purpose of this Article is two-fold: to demonstrate that the Manson rule of decision fails to safeguard due process values, in part because it does not account for the intervening social science research, and to …

The New Religious Prisons And Their Retributivist Commitments, Marc O. Degirolami

Faculty Publications

The rise of the religious, or "faith-based," prison at the turn of the twenty-first century bears witness to the remarkable resilience of religion in shaping the philosophy of punishment. In the last decade, prisons that incorporate religion in various ways have sprouted around the country and there are some indications, though preliminary, inconclusive, and hotly contested, that inmates who participate in religious instruction and “programming” recidivate at lower rates than those who do not. The early success of these programs (and, some say, the preferential treatment accorded to participants in them) has resulted in high demand and long waiting lists. …

Catalyzing More Adequate Federal Habeas Review Of Summation Misconduct: Persuasion Theory And The Sixth Amendment Right To An Unbiased Jury, Ryan P. Alford

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reviving Constitutionalism In Iraq: Key Provisions Of The Interim Constitution, His Excellency Feisal Amin Al-Istrabadi

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

People V. Yu, Barbara Yan

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Diversity Rationale: Unprovable, Uncompelling, Brian N. Lizotte

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Student body diversity-and the purported educational benefits diversity bestows- is the final Supreme Court-endorsed justification for affirmative action by public universities. Are the benefits of diversity indeed "substantial," as the Grutter majority claimed? The author analyzes the social scientific research upon which the Court relied in articulating the diversity interest. By critiquing its theory and methodology, the author shows how the research fails to prove educational benefits; and by considering the logic underlying social science generally, he shows how the causal relationship is, technically, not provable. The author questions, then, how the diversity interest can possibly be compelling.

The Juridical Structure Of Habitual Offender Laws And The Jurisprudence Of Authoritarian Social Control, Ahmed A. White

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Bullet And The Ballot? The Case For Felon Disenfranchisement Statutes, Roger Clegg, George T. Conway Iii, Kenneth K. Lee

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

No abstract provided.

New Life For The ‘Criteria Tests’ In State Constitutional Jurisprudence: ‘Gunwall Is Dead—Long Live Gunwall”, Hugh D. Spitzer

Articles

Outlines the develoment of state constitutional jurisprudence in Washington State between 1986 and 2006. Provides a general theory of state constitutional analysis, and recommends retention of the "creteria" approach to application of state constitutions, primarily as an interpretive tool.

Videotaped Confessions And The Genre Of Documentary, Jessica Silbey

Faculty Scholarship

This essay begins the exploration of two contemporary and related film trends: the recent popular enthusiasm over the previously arty documentary film and the mandatory filming of custodial interrogations and confessions.

The history and criticism of documentary film, indeed contemporary movie-going, understands the documentary genre as political and social advocacy (recent examples are Michael Moore's Farenheit 9/11 and Errol Morris's Fog of War). Judges, advocates, and legislatures, however, assume that films of custodial interrogations and confessions reveal a truth and lack a distorting point of view. As this Article explains, the trend at law, although aimed at furthering venerable criminal …

Indecent Standards: The Case Of U.S. Versus Weldon Angelos, Eva Nilsen

Faculty Scholarship

In today's highly punitive culture, perhaps Weldon Angelos' fifty-five-year sentence does not seem unusual. He's a 25-year-old man who was convicted in December 2003 of selling marijuana, possessing firearms while drug dealing, and money laundering. ³ The facts proven at trial are that on three occasions in June and July, 2002, Angelos sold eight one-ounce bags of marijuana for $350 each to a government informant. ⁴ The purchaser testified that a firearm was visible during two of these drug sales.⁵ Police seized another gun from Angelos' home five months later pursuant to a warrant.⁶ At no time was …

The Too Easy Historical Assumptions Of Crawford V. Washington, Randolph N. Jonakait

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Political Power And Judicial Power: Some Observations On Their Relation, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This Essay summarizes and perhaps extends slightly some important recent work, mostly by political scientists, on the structural relation between the array of political power in a nation's nonjudicial branch or branches and the way in which judicial review is exercised in relatively stable democracies. Robert Dahl's classic article identified one such relation. According to Dahl, "[e]xcept for short-lived transitional periods when the old alliance is disintegrating and the new one is struggling to take control of political institutions, the Supreme Court is inevitably a part of the dominant national alliance." What, though, if there is no "dominant" national political …

Quantifying Reasonable Doubt: A Proposed Solution To An Equal Protection Problem, Harry D. Saunders

ExpressO

In this article we present the case that the Reasonable Doubt standard is in urgent need of repair. Our research reveals that a previously-recognized phenomenon arising from vagueness of the standard is more consequential than thus far realized and creates a serious equal protection problem. We show that the only legally feasible solution to this problem is to quantify the definition of the standard. While others have examined quantified standards, we make a direct case for it and overcome previous objections to it by offering a way to make it practical and workable.

The solution we envision will require new …

Horizontal Federalism In An Age Of Criminal Justice Interconnectedness, Wayne A. Logan

Scholarly Publications

Despite their status as independent sovereigns, states increasingly exhibit a willingness to interact when it comes to crime control matters. This Article examines the two foremost examples of this phenomenon: criminal recidivist enhancement laws and sex offender registration laws. Both types of laws have been around for decades and have evolved to accommodate ex-offenders, who, consistent with constitutional freedom of movement, can (and often do) change state residences. This effort at accommodation, however, puts states in the unusual position of having to interpret and apply the criminal laws and outcomes of their fellow sovereigns. As the Article makes clear, recidivist …

Cleaning Up The Eighth Amendment Mess, Tom Stacy

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This article criticizes the Court's interpretation of the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause and offers its own understanding. The Court's jurisprudence is plagued by deep inconsistencies concerning the Amendment's text, the Court's own role, and a constitutional requirement of proportionate punishment. In search of ways to redress these fundamental shortcomings, the article explores three alternative interpretations of the Clause: (1) a textualist approach; (2) Justice Scalia's understanding that the Clause forbids only punishments unacceptable for all offenses; and (3) a majoritarian approach that would consistently define cruel and unusual punishment in terms of legislative judgments and penal custom. …

The "New Judicial Federalism" Before Its Time: A Comprehensive Review Of Economic Substantive Due Process Under State Constitutional Law Since 1940 And The Reasons For Its Recent Decline, Anthony B. Sanders

American University Law Review

The coming of the New Deal may have spelled the end of the Lochner era in the federal courts, but in the state courts Lochner's doctrine of economic substantive due process lives on. Since the New Deal, courts in almost every state have rebuffed the United States Supreme Court and have interpreted their own state constitutions' due process clauses to provide substantive protections to economic liberties. This Article presents a comprehensive survey of state court use of economic substantive due process since the New Deal. It includes an enumeration of every instance since 1940 of a state court of highest …

The Transnational Judicial Discourse And Felon Disenfranchisement: Re-Examining The Textual Premise Of Richardson V. Ramirez, Jason G. Morgan-Foster

ExpressO

This article is simultaneously an international comparative law piece about prisoner disenfranchisement in various countries, a transnational work of legal theory providing a framework for the use of foreign law in domestic constitutional courts, and a domestic analysis of the constitutional underpinnings of felon disenfranchisement.

The article begins with a comprehensive comparative analysis of the recent prisoner disenfranchisement decisions in Canada, South Africa, and Europe. It notes that the over-arching theme of these decisions is to view the acceptability of prisoner disenfranchisement along a continuum, where it becomes more acceptable the more serious the offense committed.

The article then examines …

Constitutional Law—First Amendment And Freedom Of Thought—Banishing Sex Offenders: Seventh Circuit Upholds Sex Offender's Ban From Public Parks After Thinking Obscene Thoughts About Children. Doe V. City Of Lafayette, 377 F.3d 757 (7th Cir. 2004)., Elizabeth Cloud

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

To Improve The State And Condition Of Man: The Power To Police And The History Of American Governance, Christopher Tomlins

Buffalo Law Review

Book review of Markus Dirk Dubber's The Police Power: Patriarchy and the Foundations of American Government

Signatures Of Ideology: The Case Of The Supreme Court's Criminal Docket, Ward Farnsworth

Michigan Law Review

Everyone suspects that Supreme Court justices' own views of policy play a part in their decisions, but the size and nature of the part is a matter of vague impression and frequent dispute. Do their preferences exert some pressure at the margin or are they better viewed as the mainsprings of decision? The latter claim, identified with legal realism, has been lent some support by political scientists who point out that some justices regularly vote for or against certain kinds of claims (for example, under the Fourth Amendment), or that votes in some areas are broadly predictable according to a …

Single Subject Rules And Public Choice Theory, Michael Gilbert

ExpressO

Despite generating thousands of cases on important public issues, the single subject rule remains a source of confusion and inconsistency. The root of the problem lies in the inability to define the term “subject” using legal doctrine. This paper reexamines the single subject rule through the lens of public choice theory and finds that its purposes are wrongheaded. Logrolling is not necessarily harmful, and improving political transparency requires legislative compromises to be packaged together rather than spread across multiple acts. Riding is not a form of logrolling but an analytically distinct and more threatening practice. This analysis yields a precise, …

Separation Of Powers And The Criminal Law, Rachel E. Barkow

ExpressO

Scholars have written volumes about the separation of powers, but they have focused on the administrative state and have wholly ignored the criminal state. Judges, too, have failed to distinguish criminal from administrative matters. So, the conventional wisdom has been that whatever theory works for the administrative state should work for anything else, including crime. And because most scholars and judges have supported a flexible or functional approach to separation of powers in the regulatory sphere, they have failed to see a problem with the functional approach when it comes to criminal matters. Indeed, the Supreme Court has been even …

The Constitutionally Inspired Approaches To Police Accountability For Violence Against Women In The U.S. And South Africa: Conservation Versus Transformation, Christopher J. Roederer

ExpressO

In the summer of 2005, the United States Supreme Court in Castle Rock v. Gonzales and the South African Constitutional Court in N.K. v. Minister of Safety & Security overturned decisions from their appellate courts. N.K. drew on the Constitutional Court decision in Carmichele v. Minister of Safety & Security. All three were torts cases involving the duties of the police, their accountability to the public, and rights of women to be free from violence, and each depended on the respective court’s interpretation of its constitution for resolution. This article focuses on the comparison, or rather, the sharp contrast between, …