Digital Commons Network^™

Effective Trial Counsel After Martinez V. Ryan: Focusing On The Adequacy Of State Procedures, Eve Brensike Primus

Articles

Everyone knows that excessive caseloads, poor funding, and a lack of training plague indigent defense delivery systems throughout the states, such that the promise of Gideon v. Wainwright is largely unfulfilled. Commentators have disagreed about how best to breathe life into Gideon . Many disclaim any possibility that federal habeas corpus review of state criminal cases could catalyze reform give n the many procedural obstacle s that currently prevent state prisoners from getting into federal court. But the Supreme Court has recently taken a renewed interest in using federal habeas review to address the problem of ineffective attorneys in state …

Appellate Division, First Department - People V. Martinez, Jean K. Delisle

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

When "Reasonableness" Is Not So Reasonable: The Need To Restore Clarity To The Appellate Review Of Federal Sentencing Decisions After Rita, Gall, And Kimbrough, Craig D. Rust

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Rise, Decline, And Fall (?) Of Miranda, Yale Kamisar

Washington Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Open Courts Checklist: Clarifying Washington's Public Trial And Public Access Jurisprudence, Jeanine Blackett Lutzenhiser

Washington Law Review

Fundamental to the American system of justice is the right to a public trial and a general presumption of openness in judicial proceedings. These values are reflected in the First and Sixth Amendments of the United States Constitution and in many state constitutions. Washington is one of a number of states whose constitution (unlike the U.S. Constitution) also explicitly guarantees the open administration of justice. Constitutional dilemmas arise when a party requests the closure of a courtroom or the sealing of documents. These requests force courts to harmonize values of open justice with other compelling interests. U.S. Supreme Court decisions …

Harmonizing Equitable Exceptions: Why Courts Should Recognize An “Actual Innocence” Exception To The Aedpa’S Statute Of Limitations, Morgan Suder

San Diego Law Review

This Comment argues that to neutralize this potential inequality, the Supreme Court should affirm the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Lee v. Lampert, finding that a credible claim of actual innocence constitutes an equitable exception to the AEDPA’s one-year statute of limitations period. District courts must be able to call on their equitable powers, including both equitable principles already applied to the AEDPA’s statute of limitations as well as the actual innocence exception, in determining whether a district court may consider the merits of a criminal defendant’s otherwise untimely habeas petition.

Part II discusses the role of federal habeas corpus …

Plea Bargaining And The Right To The Effective Assistance Of Counsel: Where The Rubber Hits The Road In Capital Cases, John H. Blume

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Perfecting Criminal Markets, David Jaros

All Faculty Scholarship

From illicit drugs to human smuggling to prostitution, legislators may actually be perfecting the very criminal markets they seek to destroy. Criminal laws often create new dangers and new criminal opportunities. Criminalizing drugs creates the opportunity to sell fake drugs. Raising the penalties for illegal immigration increases the risk that smugglers will rely on dangerous methods that can injure or kill their human cargo. Banning prostitution increases the underground spread of sexually transmitted disease. Lawmakers traditionally respond to these “second order” problems in predictable fashion — with a new wave of criminalization that imposes additional penalties on fake drug dealers, …

A Power And A Duty: Prosecutorial Discretion And Obligation In United States Sentencing Guideline § 3e1.1(B), Laura Waters

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Offender And The Victim, Edward Tromanhauser

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Crime Victims' Rights -- A Legislative Perspective, William Van Regenmorter

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Emerging Issues In Victim Assistance, Marlene A. Young

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Progress In The Victim Reform Movement: No Longer The "Forgotten Victim", David L. Roland

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Elevation Of Victims' Rights In Washington State: Constitutional Status, Ken Eikenberry

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Victims' Rights: An Idea Whose Time Has Come--Five Years Later: The Maturing Of An Idea, Frank Carrington, George Nicholson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Introduction, Ronald F. Phillips

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Right To Waive Competent Counsel: Extending The Faretta Waiver, Augustine Gerard Yee

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Resolving A "Substantial Question": Just Who Is Entitled To Bail Pending Appeal Under The Bail Reform Act Of 1984?, Doug Keller

Florida Law Review

Under the Bail Reform Act of 1984, federal criminal defendants who wish to remain free on bail after conviction must prove that their appeal will have enough merit to raise at least one “substantial question.” Federal appellate courts, however, have been deeply divided over how much merit is required to show that an appeal will raise a “substantial question.” Ten circuits define the phrase as a “close question,” based on an implausible reading of the 1984 Bail Act’s legislative history. But the Ninth Circuit has interpreted the requirement to mean that a defendant must prove that his appeal will raise …

The Case For Overturning Williams V. Florida And The Six-Person Jury: History, Law, And Empirical Evidence, Alisa Smith, Michael J. Saks

Florida Law Review

After 700 years of common-law history and nearly 200 years of constitutional history, the Supreme Court concluded that the constitutionally permissible minimum jury size could not be inferred from the language or the history of the Constitution. The answer, said the Court in Williams v. Florida, could be found only through a “functional analysis” of the performance of smaller juries (that is, empirical examination of the behavior of different-sized juries). The Court implicitly abandoned that analysis in Ballew v. Georgia, when it held that juries with fewer than six members were unconstitutional—a decision based on nothing more than …

Bail Pending Trial: Changing Interpretations Of The Bail Reform Act And The Importance Of Bail From Defense Attorneys’ Perspectives, Clara Kalhous, John Meringolo

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

Milking The New Sacred Cow: The Supreme Court Limits The Peremptory Challenge On Racial Grounds In Powers V. Ohio And Edmonson V. Leesville Concrete Co., Bradley R. Kirk

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Adult Survivors Of Childhood Sexual Abuse And The Statute Of Limitations: The Need For Consistent Application Of The Delayed Discovery Rule, Gregory G. Gordon

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Gender And Sentencing: Single Moms, Battered Women, And Other Sex-Based Anomalies In The Gender-Free World Of The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Myrna S. Raeder

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Punishment Need Not Fit The Crime: Harmelin V. Michigan And The Eigth Amendment, Scott K. Petersen

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Double Jeopardy Violations As "Plain Error" Under Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 52(B), Gabriel J. Chin

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Irreconcilable Differences: Yet More Attitudinal Discrepancies Between Death Penalty Opponents And Proponents: A California Sample, Robert J. Robinson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Notice-And-Comment Sentencing, Richard A. Bierschbach, Stephanos Bibas

Articles

The article argues that criminal sentencing, often perceived as a singular, justice-focused moment, is in reality a complex, fragmented process heavily influenced by prosecutorial discretion and plea bargaining. It contends that public participation, inspired by principles of administrative law, could enhance the fairness, transparency, and legitimacy of sentencing and related processes, such as charging and plea bargaining. By integrating public input and structured decision-making, the criminal justice system could better align with democratic values and address systemic disparities.

What Goes Around Comes Around-Nichols V. United States: Validating The Collateral Use Of Uncounseled Misdemeanor Convictions For The Purpose Of Sentence Enhancement, Andrea E. Joseph

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mandatory Chemical Castration For Perpetrators Of Sex Offenses Against Children: Following California's Lead, Peter J. Gimino Iii

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Wading In The Sargasso Sea: The Double Jeopardy Clause, Non-Capital Sentencing Proceedings, And California's "Three Strikes" Law Collide In Monge V. California, Michael Kline

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.