Law Commons^™

The Entrapment Defense And Procedural Issues: Burden Of Proof, Questions Of Law And Fact, Inconsistent Defenses, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus has produced an extremely thorough article on the intriguing and complex defense of entrapment. After analyzing the subjective and objective approaches to the defense, the author turns to the infrequently addressed question of evidence on predisposition. Included here are the recent ABSCAM cases.

Finally, the author explores the vagaries of inconsistent defenses and, on the whole, provides academics and practitioners with a refreshing and useful guide to some of the most important questions involving entrapment.

The Development Of Entrapment Law, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

The Challenge Of Prosecuting Organized Crime In The United States: Procedural Issues, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

The Allen Instruction In Criminal Cases: Is The Dynamite Charge About To Be Permanently Defused?, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

The Confrontation Clause And Co-Defendant Confessions: The Drift From Bruton To Parker V. Randolph, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

The Crime Of Conspiracy Thrives In Decisions Of The United States Supreme Court, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

Proving Entrapment Under The Predisposition Test, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

Restrictions On Law Enforcement Investigation And Prosecution Of Crime, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

Presenting, Back From The [Almost] Dead, The Entrapment Defense, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

It's Not Just About Miranda: Determining The Voluntariness Of Confessions In Criminal Prosecutions, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

Investigatory Practices And The Changing Entrapment Defense, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

Defending Miranda, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

Conspiracy: The Criminal Agreement, In Theory And In Practice, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

Professor Marcus combines empirical research and theoretical analysis in this comprehensive study of the conspiracy doctrine. The article shows that the theoretical reasons for the conspiracy doctrine are inapplicable to most actual conspiracy prosecutions and that the practical reasons for conspiracy charges are often unacceptable prosecutorial shortcuts. Although ultimately concluding that the conspiracy doctrine is needed in some limited instances, Professor Marcus indicates that prosecutors should bring conspiracy charges only when justified by proper reasons and that courts should consider such charges more carefully.

Criminal Conspiracy Law: Time To Turn Back From An Ever Expanding, Ever More Troubling Area, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

Correcting Deadly Confusion: Responding To Jury Inquiries In Capital Cases, Stephen P. Garvey, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

Combatendo A Corrupção Nos Estados Unidos, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

The article discusses the problematic of the fight against the corruption by the criminal justice system of the United States, mainly the white-collar crimes. It is emphasized, first, that in most of the cases does not result in trial, but in plea bargains, and, second, in many cases the encouragement from an undercover agent has served as an effective defense instrument. Finally, it is discussed the problematic of the use of information obtained from the technological devices and its probable violation to the right privacy.

This article is in Portuguese.

Co-Conspirator Declarations: The Federal Rules Of Evidence And Other Recent Developments, From A Criminal Law Perspective, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

Perhaps the most important advantage available to a prosecutor in a criminal conspiracy case is the exception to the hearsay rule for co-conspirator declarations. The exception is widely used and is often a significant part of the government presentation. In essence, it provides that otherwise inadmissible hearsay declarations of coconspirators are admissible at trial against the defendant so long as they were made during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy. The exception typically arises when an alleged co-conspirator declarant tells the witness (often an undercover police officer) all about the conspiracy, perhaps in the hope of attracting a …

Book Review Of The Model Penal Code And Commentaries, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

Capital Punishment In The United States, And Beyond, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

This article explores the controversial topic of capital punishment, with a particular focus on its longstanding application in the United States. The use of the death penalty in the US has been the subject of much criticism both domestically and internationally. The numerous concerns addressed in this article relate to the morality of the punishment, its effectiveness, the uneven application of the penalty, and procedural problems. The US Supreme Court has confirmed the constitutionality of capital punishment while striking down particular uses of the death penalty. The US is not, however, alone in executing convicted defendants. Capital punishment is still …

A Return To The "Bright Line Rule" Of Miranda, Paul Marcus

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

Australia And The United States: Two Common Criminal Justice Systems Uncommonly At Odds, Part 2, Paul Marcus, Vicki Waye

Paul Marcus

No abstract provided.

Australia And The United States: Two Common Criminal Justice Systems Uncommonly At Odds, Paul Marcus, Vicki Waye

Paul Marcus

At first glance the criminal justice systems of Australia and the United States look strikingly similar. With common law roots from England, they both emphasize the adversary system, the roleof the advocate, the presumption of innocence, and an appeals process. Upon closer reflection,however, they appear starkly different. From both Australian and U.S. perspectives, the authorsexplore those differences, examining important features such as the exclusion of evidence, rules regarding interrogation, the entrapment defense, and the open nature of trials. The Article concludes with an analysis of the reasons for those differences, reasons that heavily relate back to the founding of the …

Economic Hardship As Coercion Under The Protocol On International Trafficking In Persons By Organized Crime Elements, Linda A. Malone

Linda A. Malone

No abstract provided.

Too Ill To Be Killed: Mental And Physical Competency To Be Executed Pursuant To The Death Penalty, Linda A. Malone

Linda A. Malone

Mentally ill individuals are being housed in prisons and jails throughout the country. Due to decreased funding and overpopulation of correctional facilities, individuals with pre-existing illnesses, as well as others who develop illnesses, are in severe need of mental health services and punished for their ailments through the use of solitary confinement, long prison sentences, and lack of care. The stress created by such conditions is amplified for mentally ill prisoners who are awaiting execution or the dismissal of their death row sentences. These individuals must show that they are competent to stand trial, exhibit the mental state required for …

Is There Really A Difference Between Justification And Excuse Or Did We Academics Make It Up?, Linda A. Malone

Linda A. Malone

No abstract provided.

From Breard To Atkins To Malvo: Legal Incompetency And Human Rights Norms On The Fringes Of The Death Penalty, Linda A. Malone

Linda A. Malone

No abstract provided.

Beyond Bosnia And In Re Kasinga: A Feminist Perspective On Recent Developments In Protecting Women From Sexual Violence, Linda A. Malone

Linda A. Malone

No abstract provided.

Funeral Oration In Honor Of United States V. Burton, Fredric I. Lederer

Fredric I. Lederer

No abstract provided.

Doing Away With The Exclusionary Rule, Francis A. Gilligan, Fredric I. Lederer

Fredric I. Lederer

No abstract provided.

Procuring Guilty Pleas For International Crimes: The Limited Influence Of Sentencing Discounts, Nancy Amoury Combs

Nancy Combs

International tribunals prosecuting those responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes face many of the same resource constraints that bedevil national criminal justice systems. Consequently, international tribunals have begun to utilize various procedural devices long used by national prosecutors to speed case dispositions. One such procedural device is the guilty plea. National prosecutors induce criminal defendants to plead guilty and waive their rights to trial through a process of plea bargaining; that is, by offering defendants sentencing concessions in exchange for their guilty pleas. International prosecutors who seek to engage in plea bargaining, however, face a host of …