Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Court interpretation (2)
- Admissibility (1)
- Applicability (1)
- Arkansas Supreme Court (1)
- Border patrol (1)
-
- Criminal defendents (1)
- Criminal sentencing (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (1)
- Felony-murder (1)
- Foreign relations (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Immigration Law; Criminal Law (1)
- Insanity defense (1)
- Judicial reform (1)
- Justice (1)
- National security (1)
- Plea negotiation (1)
- Prosecutorial discretion (1)
- Prosecutorial misconduct (1)
- Public policy (1)
- Reach (1)
- Reasonable suspicion (1)
- Rule 410 (1)
- Rule-making authority (1)
- Sentencing guidelines (1)
- State commission (1)
- State courts (1)
- State purview (1)
- Textualism (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Quiet War: The Judiciary's Steady And Unspoken Effort To Limit Felony-Murder, Maggie Davis
A Quiet War: The Judiciary's Steady And Unspoken Effort To Limit Felony-Murder, Maggie Davis
Arkansas Law Review
On a Wednesday afternoon a sixteen-year-old boy is hanging out after school with four of his friends. He is your average sixteen-year-old; he has a girlfriend who works at Wendy’s, and his current worry is about passing his driving test. He smokes some weed from time to time with his friends, but he has a clean criminal record. After complaining about being broke and deciding they have nothing better to do, the five friends elect to break into a seemingly vacant home in order to steal some items for resale. He is already thinking about what he will buy with …
Same Grid, Different Results: Criminal Sentencing Disparities Between Arkansas Counties, Alexis Stevens
Same Grid, Different Results: Criminal Sentencing Disparities Between Arkansas Counties, Alexis Stevens
Arkansas Law Review
Abraham Davis is a resident of Fort Smith, Arkansas—and a convicted felon. In May of 2017, the Sebastian County Circuit Court, Fort Smith District, charged Davis with criminal mischief in the first degree, as a Class D felony, for purposely destroying the property of another. Davis’s charge resulted in a criminal sentence ranging from as little as probation to as much as 6 years jail time and/or up to $10,000.00 in fines. This sentencing determination is generally allocated to the judge and prosecutor. However, victim intervention persuaded the court to release Davis on probation, sparing him from a much harsher …
Unbuckling The Seat Belt Defense In Arkansas, Spencer G. Dougherty
Unbuckling The Seat Belt Defense In Arkansas, Spencer G. Dougherty
Arkansas Law Review
The “seat belt defense” has been hotly litigated over the decades in numerous jurisdictions across the United States. It is an affirmative defense that, when allowed, reduces a plaintiff’s recovery for personal injuries resulting from an automobile collision where the defendant can establish that those injuries would have been less severe or avoided entirely had the plaintiff been wearing an available seat belt. This is an unsettled legal issue in Arkansas, despite the growing number of cases in which the seat belt defense is raised as an issue. Most jurisdictions, including Arkansas, initially rejected the defense, but the basis for …
Recent Developments, Peyton Hildebrand
Recent Developments, Peyton Hildebrand
Arkansas Law Review
In a 5-4 opinion, the United States Supreme Court once again denied a Bivens action. This case involved a tragic crossborder shooting by a border patrol agent standing on United States soil, who shot and killed a young boy standing on Mexican soil. Petitioners, the boy’s parents, sought relief under Biven2, arguing the agent’s action violated the Constitution. However, the Court determined the cross-border shooting was a new Bivens context, which required an analysis of whether any special factors “counseled hesitation” for the cause of action to be extended. The Court concluded Bivens was inappropriate because several factors “counseled hesitation”—namely, …
"Against The Defendant": Plea Rule's Purpose V. Plain Meaning, Nick Bell
"Against The Defendant": Plea Rule's Purpose V. Plain Meaning, Nick Bell
Arkansas Law Review
Rarely is there a proverbial “smoking gun” in criminal prosecutions. Instead, prosecutors and defense attorneys must tell juries competing stories—largely from circumstantial evidence—and allow jurors to determine what happened based on inferences gleaned from argument and testimony. Naturally, this creates substantial uncertainty for both prosecutors and defendants. Instead of rolling the dice at trial, the vast majority of criminal matters are resolved through plea bargaining. Plea bargaining provides both sides with a certainty otherwise unobtainable through a traditional trial. The prosecution guarantees itself a conviction, and the defendant will often receive a lighter sentence than if he or she had …
Recent Developments, Raelynn J. Hillhouse