Digital Commons Network^™

The Market For Criminal Justice: Federalism, Crime Control And Jurisdictional Competition, Doron Teichman

Law & Economics Working Papers Archive: 2003-2009

For the most part, the United States has a decentralized criminal justice system. State legislatures define the majority of crimes and set out the punishments for those crimes. In addition, the enforcement of criminal laws lies, in most cases, in the hands of local law enforcement agencies. This article points out how this decentralized structure drives local jurisdictions to harshen their criminal justice system in order to displace crime to neighboring jurisdictions. More precisely, local jurisdictions can attempt to displace crime in two distinct ways. First, they can raise the expected sanction to a level that is higher than that …

Sex, Shame, And The Law: An Economic Perspective On Megan's Law, Doron Teichman

Law & Economics Working Papers Archive: 2003-2009

This Article focuses on the question, how should policymakers aiming to minimize the cost of sanctioning utilize legal and nonlegal sanctions when designing a system of criminal sanctions. After presenting the general economic case for the use of nonlegal sanctions the article turns to present a model of shaming, which unlike existing models, incorporates the endogenous effects of legal and nonlegal sanctions. This model demonstrates that tailoring an efficient regime that combines legal and nonlegal sanctions might be more difficult than previously perceived by law and economics scholars. A specific case study presented in this article is of the current …

Apprendi's Limits, Roger Craig Green

ExpressO

This article argues that Blakely v. Washington did not decide (explicitly or implicitly) whether the Federal Sentencing Guidelines are constitutional. It also claims that the best interpretation of Apprendi v. New Jersey would uphold the Guidelines because they do not result in a punishment above the crime of conviction's statutory maximum. The notion that statutory maxima are constitutionally important stems from separation of power principles. Congress, not the Commission, is responsible for defining crimes, and thereby for prescribing how much punishment is authorized by a jury's guilty verdict.

State, Be Not Proud: A Retributivist Defense Of The Commutation Of Death Row And The Abolition Of The Death Penalty, Dan Markel

ExpressO

In the aftermath of Governor Ryan's decision last year to commute the sentences of each offender on Illinois' death row, various scholars have claimed that Ryan’s action was a “grave injustice” and, from a retributivist perspective, “an unmitigated moral disaster.” This Article contests that position, showing not only why a commutation of death row is permitted under principles of retributive justice, but also why it might be required. When properly understood, retributive justice, in its commitment to moral accountability and equal liberty, hinges on modesty and dignity in modes of punishment. In this vein, retributivism opposes the apparently ineluctable slide …

The New Russian Roulette: Brady Revisited, Jannice E. Joseph

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Ring Around The Grand Jury: Informing Grand Jurors Of The Capital Consequences Of Aggravating Facts, K. Brent Tomer

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-264.5*

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Hoist With Their Own Petard?, Steven L. Chanenson

Working Paper Series

In 2003, Congress and the Department of Justice tried to increase their control over the United States Sentencing Commission and federal sentencing generally. Congress appeared to have achieved this goal when it passed the Prosecutorial Remedies and Tools Against the Exploitation of Children Today Act of 2003 (“PROTECT Act”), which resulted in reduced grounds for downward departures, Congressionally-revised text of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, and a constrained Sentencing Commission potentially devoid of judges. Yet pro-government interpretations of the PROTECT Act may have been premature because the Supreme Court has now struck down parts of Washington State’s legislatively-enacted sentencing guidelines in …

Double Jeopardy And The Death Penalty: A Fundamental Constitutional Protection With Life Or Death Consequences, Kristen Lindsay Todd

Campbell Law Review

What is the effect of a deadlocked jury in a sentencing hearing for the application of the death penalty on the termination of jeopardy? This comment will explore this issue as presented in Sattazahn v. Pennsylvania, and analyze not only the arguments made in both the majority and dissenting opinions, but other considerations which arise when deciding if double jeopardy protections should apply. Also considered in the comment is the effect of the Sattazahn decision on future criminal defendants. What consequences will this decision have for the death row defendant when trying to decide whether to appeal his possibly erroneous …

Flouting The Law, Janice Nadler

ExpressO

What happens when a person’s common sense view of justice diverges from the sense of justice he or she sees enshrined in particular laws? In particular, does the perception of one particular law as unjust make an individual less likely to comply with unrelated laws? This Article advances the Flouting Thesis – the idea that the perceived legitimacy of one law can influence one’s willingness to comply with unrelated laws – and provides original experimental evidence to support this thesis. This Article presents new, original evidence that one’s willingness to disobey the law can extend far beyond the particular unjust …

'You'd Better Be Good': Congressional Threats Of Removal Against Federal Judges, Marc O. Degirolami

ExpressO

In the attached article, I argue that congressional threats of removal against federal judges are increasing in prevalence and forcefulness and that as a result the strained relationship between the judiciary and Congress – a topic of recent attention and debate – will continue to deteriorate in the coming years. I examine two bills, the Feeney Amendment to the PROTECT Act and House of Representatives Resolution 568 (in which Congress would disavow citation in judicial decisions to foreign law), to demonstrate this thesis.

I next ask what explains the phenomenon of congressional threats of removal, deploying first Thomas Hobbes’ state-of-nature …

The Rise Of Managerial Judging In International Criminal Law, Maximo Langer

ExpressO

Abstract This article puts the procedure of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in a completely new and previously unexplored light. Rejecting the predominant view of ICTY procedure as a hybrid between the adversarial system of the U.S. and the inquisitorial system of civil law jurisdictions, this article shows that ICTY procedure is best described through a third procedural model that does not fit in either of the two traditional systems. This third procedural model is close to the managerial judging system that has been adopted in U.S. civil procedure. The article then explores some of the …

Forecasting Harm: The Law And Science Of Risk Assessment Among Prisoners, Predators, And Patients, John Monahan

ExpressO

Scientifically valid instruments are being used for the first time to assess an individual’s risk of violence in criminal sentencing and in the civil commitment of mental patients and sexual predators. Risk factors on these instruments pertain to what the person is (e.g., gender), what the person has (e.g., personality disorder), what the person has done (e.g., past violence), and what has been done to the person (e.g., past victimization). In this Article, I argue that in criminal law, with its emphasis on blameworthiness for actions taken, the admissibility of scientifically valid risk factors is properly constrained to those that …

An Attitudinal Theory Of Excuse In Criminal Law, Peter Westen

ExpressO

The mother lode of criminal law scholarship is a unitary theory of excuses, that is, a normative account as to why a person who engages in conduct that a criminal statute prohibits ought nevertheless not be blamed for it. After defining "excuse" against commentators who argue that it cannot be coherently defined, and after criticizing competing theories of excuse, I argue that the feature that renders persons normatively blameless -- and, typically, legally blameless, too -- for engaging in conduct that a criminal statute prohibits is the possession of a certain attitude with which he engages in it. A person …

A Public Choice Theory Of Criminal Procedure, Vikramaditya S. Khanna, Keith N. Hylton

ExpressO

We provide a more persuasive justification for the pro-defendant bias in Anglo-American criminal procedure than the most commonly forwarded justifications to date. The most commonly forwarded rationale for the pro-defendant bias is that the costs of false convictions – specifically, the sanctioning and deterrence costs associated with the erroneous imposition of criminal sanctions – are greater than the costs of false acquittals. We argue that this rationale provides at best a partial justification for the extent of pro-defendant procedural rules. Under our alternative justification, pro-defendant protections serve primarily as constraints on the costs associated with improper enforcement or rent seeking …

The Dilution Effect: Federalization, Fair Cross-Sections, And The Concept Of Community, Laura G. Dooley

ExpressO

The question of the relevant community from which a fair cross-section of jurors should be drawn has received little theoretical attention. This article seeks to fill that gap by using communitarian and postmodern theory to give content to the idea of "community" in the fair cross-section context. This analysis is timely and has grave practical importance, given that the federal government is increasingly assuming the prosecution of crime previously dealt with at the state level. This "federalization" of criminal enforcement has the second-order effect of changing the "community" from which criminal juries will be drawn, particularly in urban areas surrounded …

The Legacy Of The Prompt Complaint Requirement, Corroboration Requirement, And Cautionary Instructions On Campus Sexual Assault, Michelle J. Anderson

Working Paper Series

No abstract provided.

Fletcher's Rethinking: A Memoir, Kyron J. Huigens

Articles

No abstract provided.

A Deep Breath Before The Plunge: Undoing Miranda's Failure Before It's Too Late, Benjamin D. Cunningham

Mercer Law Review

The Supreme Court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona has been and will be a lightning rod for controversy so long as it remains in effect. The decision has been lauded for its apparent protection of individual dignity from overzealous police and criticized as an unwarranted shackle on legitimate law enforcement techniques. Nevertheless, Miranda has weathered the storms and, thanks to the Supreme Court's decision in Dickerson v. United States, has endured. Unknown to most proponents or detractors, however, Miranda has had little effect on what actually occurs during police interrogations. The reasons for this are varied. First, by creating …

The Sky Is Not Falling—That Which You Feel Is Merely A No. 10 Earthquake—Blakely V. Washington: The Supreme Court Sentences The American Criminal Justice System To Disaster, Bedlam, And Reform, Christopher P. Carrington

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

“Which One Of You Did It?” Criminal Liability For “Causing Or Allowing” The Death Of A Child, Lissa Griffin

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Why It Is Essential To Teach About Mental Health Issues In Criminal Law (And A Primer On How To Do It), Richard E. Redding

Working Paper Series

Studies consistently show a high prevalence of mental disorders among criminal defendants. Forensic mental health issues thus arise frequently in the criminal justice system and are commonly encountered by prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges—much more so than some criminal law doctrines (e.g., necessity, duress, impossibility) routinely taught in criminal law courses. Yet rarely are students taught about mental illness, how to represent mentally ill clients, adjudicative competence, the mental health needs of various offender groups and how these unmet needs may contribute to criminal behavior, or the use of mental health mitigation evidence at sentencing. If taught at all, such …

Summerlin V. Stewart And Ring Retroactivity, Tonya G. Newman

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants a trial before a jury. Until the Supreme Court decided Ring v. Arizona, however, nine states wholly or partially surrendered a portion of the jury's role to a sentencing judge. Specifically, those states allowed sentencing judges to make factual determinations regarding sentencing considerations by which capital defendants became eligible for the death penalty. The Ring Court halted the use of sentencing considerations to erode the jury's fundamental role in preserving accuracy and fairness of criminal proceedings, holding that the Sixth Amendment requires that a jury make factual findings on all elements, including sentencing …

Memorandum Presenting The Case For Rapid Congressional Action In Response To Blakely V. Washington, Frank O. Bowman Iii

Faculty Publications

Soon after the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Blakely v. Washington, which invalidated the Washington state sentencing guidelines and cast doubt on the constitutionality of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on "Blakely v. Washington and the Future of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines." Witnesses from the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Sentencing Commission, and the judiciary downplayed the seriousness of the situation and urged caution in any congressional action. Concerned that the situation in the courts was more dire than the institutional witnesses had been willing to admit, Professor Frank Bowman subsequently …

The Roadmap For Failure: Israeli And Palestinian Discountenance And Misunderstanding, John J. Marciano

ExpressO

As tensions rise with the assassination of key Hamas figures, the situation in Israel and the Occupied Territories call out for committed, reasoned action. In the past, the peace process has consisted of half-hearted attempts to pacify both the Israeli and Palestinian populaces. This is exemplified by the recent Roadmap for peace, which was supported by the United States.

However, the lack of true dedication among the players has arguably resulted in crimes against humanity on both sides. The previous peace plans fail to recognize this, and have perpetuated the violence with cookie-cutter approaches that are not closely tailored to …

Is It Wrong To Commute Death Row? Retribution, Atonement, And Mercy, Stephen P. Garvey

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Is it a morally permissible exercise of mercy for a governor to commute the death sentences of everyone on a state's death row, as Governor Ryan recently did in Illinois? I distinguish three different theories of mercy. The first two theories locate mercy within a theory of punishment as retribution. The first theory treats mercy as a means by which to achieve equity. As such, this theory is not really a theory of mercy; it is instead a theory of justice. The second theory treats mercy as a genuine virtue independent of justice. In particular, mercy is understood as an …

Does Time Eclipse Crime? Stogner V. California And The Court's Determination Of The Ex Post Facto Limitations On Retroactive Justice, Ryan D. Frei

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pleas' Progress, Stephanos Bibas

Michigan Law Review

George Fisher's new book, Plea Bargaining's Triumph, is really three books in one. The first part is a careful, detailed explanation of how and why plea bargaining exploded in Middlesex County, Massachusetts in the nineteenth century. This part is the fruit of an impressive amount of original research in Massachusetts court records and newspaper archives. The second part of the book looks more broadly at other academic histories of plea bargaining in England, California, and New York. It explains how the forces that produced plea bargaining in Middlesex County likewise contributed to plea bargaining's rise elsewhere. The final part …

Justice In The Time Of Terror, Sharon L. Davies

Michigan Law Review

On my drive into work recently I found myself behind a Ford pickup truck and noticed its bumper sticker: "When the going gets tough, I get a machine gun." Not a doctor. Not a counselor or mediator. Not a shelter for cover. Not the wisdom of a favored advisor or a proven friend. But a machine gun. How odd, I thought, to prefer a weapon incapable of identifying with any precision, any careful thought, where the enemy of the wielder of it might actually be hidden. A weapon as apt to injure non-targets as targets. A weapon mindless of its …

Unraveling Unlawful Entrapment, Anthony M. Dillof

ExpressO

No abstract provided.