Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Collateral Consequences Of Pretrial Diversion Programs Under The Heck Doctrine, Bonnie Gill
Collateral Consequences Of Pretrial Diversion Programs Under The Heck Doctrine, Bonnie Gill
Washington and Lee Law Review
Following the Introduction, Part II of this Note gives an overview of federal and state pretrial diversion programs. Part III explores the statutory and doctrinal background of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, including its interaction with another civil rights statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the federal habeas statute. Both statutes are essential to understanding the Heck v. Humphrey doctrine’s purpose and application to pretrial diversion participants. Part III also explores the development and interpretation of the Heck doctrine in four Supreme Court cases. Part IV discusses the circuit split as it currently stands. Part V presents three proposals for resolving the …
Saving Justice: Why Sentencing Errors Fall Within The Savings Clause, 28 U.S.C. § 2255(E), Brandon Hasbrouck
Saving Justice: Why Sentencing Errors Fall Within The Savings Clause, 28 U.S.C. § 2255(E), Brandon Hasbrouck
Scholarly Articles
Notwithstanding the extent to which scholars, lawyers, and community organizers are broadening their contestations of the criminal justice system, they have paid insufficient attention to federal sentencing regimes. Part of the reason for this is that sentencing is a “back-end” criminal justice problem and much of our nation’s focus on criminal justice issues privileges “front-end” problems like policing. Another explanation might be that the rules governing sentencing are complex and cannot be easily rearticulated in the form of political soundbites. Yet sentencing regimes are a criminal justice domain in which inequalities abound—and in ways that raise profound questions about fairness, …
Challenging The Habeas Process Rather Than The Result, Justin F. Marceau
Challenging The Habeas Process Rather Than The Result, Justin F. Marceau
Washington and Lee Law Review
Habeas scholarship has repeatedly assessed whether the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act’s (AEDPA’s) limitations on federal habeas relief were as severe in practice as they appeared to be on paper. By analyzing recent doctrinal shifts—particularly focusing on two Supreme Court decisions from this Term—and substantial new empirical data, this Article acknowledges that AEDPA’s bite has reached substantial proportions, in many ways exceeding the initial concerns and hype surrounding the legislation. More importantly, after acknowledging that federal habeas relief from state court convictions has become “microscopically” rare, this Article considers what the rarity of relief ought to mean as a …
Lefkowitz V. Newsome: The Supreme Court Takes Another Look At Guilty Pleas
Lefkowitz V. Newsome: The Supreme Court Takes Another Look At Guilty Pleas
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.