Law Commons^™

Overcoming The Peremptory's Greatest Challenge, Brian A. Wilson

Faculty Scholarship

Four decades after the Supreme Judicial Court ("SJC") first proscribed certain group-based peremptory challenges, eradicating unlawful discrimination in jury selection has gained renewed interest. Yet so long as Massachusetts retains the inherently flawed three-step "Batson-Soares" test, lawyers seeking to exclude jurors for impermissible reasons will proceed virtually undeterred.

The solution is not to abolish peremptory challenges, as Arizona did in 2022. When exercised lawfully, they enable litigants to remove jurors they legitimately perceive as biased where a challenge for cause, due to its narrow scope, legally cannot. Eliminating peremptories would provide the parties little opportunity to influence who decides the …

Quo Vadis? Assessing New York’S Civil Forfeiture Law, Steven L. Kessler

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dna Exonerations And Stakeholder Responses: A Case Of Cognitive Dissonance, Anne Richardson Oakes, Julian Killingley

Tennessee Law Review

The availability of DNA testing developed in the 1980s transformed the ability of prosecutors to secure convictions while providing Innocence Projects with the tools to overturn them. However, DNA exonerations which establish conclusively that a person convicted of a crime is in fact innocent, can represent a major threat to the value systems and therefore the self-belief of stakeholders who acted in good faith and in the genuine but mistaken belief that the exoneree was guilty. This Article reports on the findings of an investigation into stakeholder responses to DNA exonerations between 1990-1999 when DNA evidence was new and more …

How Experts Have Dominated The Neuroscience Narrative In Criminal Cases For Twelve Decades: A Warning For The Future, Deborah W. Denno

Faculty Scholarship

Phineas Gage, the man who survived impalement by a rod through his head in 1848, is considered “one of the great medical curiosities of all time.” While expert accounts of Gage's post-accident personality changes are often wildly damning and distorted, recent research shows that Gage mostly thrived, despite his trauma. Studying past cases such as Gage’s helps us imagine—and prepare for—a future of law and neuroscience in which scientific debates over the brain’s functions remain fiery, and experts divisively control how we characterize brain-injured defendants.

This Article examines how experts have long dominated the neuroscience narrative in U.S. criminal cases, …