Law Commons^™

Cruise Ship And Crime: How To Better Protect United States’ Citizens Who Are Victims Of Crime On The High Seas, Eda Harotounian

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Willful Blindness As Mere Evidence, Gregory M. Gilchrist

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The willful blindness doctrine at criminal law is well-established and generally fits with moral intuitions of guilt. It also stands in direct tension with the first principle of American criminal law: legality. This Article argues that courts could largely preserve the doctrine and entirely avoid the legality problem with a simple shift: willful blindness ought to be reconceptualized as a form of evidence.

Whose Rights Matter More—Police Privacy Or A Defendant’S Right To A Fair Trial?, Laurie L. Levenson

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The function of the prosecutor under the federal Constitution is not to tack as many skins of victims as possible to the wall. His function is to vindicate the right of the people as expressed in the laws and give those accused of crime a fair trial.

– William O. Douglas

The Need For A Historical Exception To Grand Jury Secrecy In The Federal Rules Of Criminal Procedure, Daniel Aronsohn

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supervised Release Is Not Parole, Jacob Schuman

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The United States has the largest prison population in the developed world. Yet outside prisons, there are almost twice as many people serving terms of criminal supervision in the community— probation, parole, and supervised release. At the federal level, this “mass supervision” of convicted offenders began with the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, which abolished parole and created a harsher and more expansive system called supervised release. Last term in United States v. Haymond, the Supreme Court took a small step against mass supervision by striking down one provision of the supervised release statute as violating the right to …

Young V. Hawaii: A Dangerous Precedent, Michael Jimenez

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Evolution Of Juvenile Justice From The Book Of Leviticus To Parens Patriae: The Next Step After In Re Gault, Donald E. Mcinnis, Shannon Cullen, Julia Schon

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

Since the arrival of the Pilgrims, American jurisprudence has known that its law-breaking children must be treated differently than adults. How children are treated by the law raises ethical and constitutional issues. This Article questions the current approach, which applies adult due process protections to children who are unable to fully understand their constitutional rights and the consequences of waiving those rights. The authors propose new Miranda warnings and a Bill of Rights for Children to protect children and their constitutional right to due process under the law.

Overdue Justice: People V. Valenzuela And The Path Toward Gang Prosecution Reform, Ryan Nelson

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

People V. Buza: A Step In The Wrong Direction, Emily R. Pincin

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Re Cook And The Franklin Proceeding: New Door, Same Dilapidated House, Christopher Hawthorne, Marisa Sacks

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The California Supreme Court’s decision in In re Cook was supposed to bring about a sea change in the way trial courts conduct Franklin mitigation hearings for youthful offenders. In fact, while Cook changed the procedure for initiating a post-conviction Franklin proceeding, little else has changed, including the lack of agreement among attorneys concerning best practices in these proceedings, and a less than less-than-enthusiastic response from the criminal defense bar. Absent any guidance from higher courts, the Franklin proceeding is limited by the personal and institutional energies and preferences of judges, prosecutors, public defenders and private defense counsel. The authors …

Making Constitutional Sense: A Modal Approach To California's Proposition 66, Alan Romero

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

For years, the California Supreme Court has adopted a deferential posture when reviewing state constitutional challenges to a ballot initiative. The decision in Briggs v. Brown underscored the degree to which courts are willing to avoid striking down ballot initiatives on constitutional grounds, such as by broadly construing the initiative’s language to avoid constitutional problems. In construing the language of Proposition 66 to avoid separation of powers problems, however, Briggs effectively re-interpreted central pillars of Proposition 66 in ways rendering it unrecognizable to Californians who cast votes for and against the initiative. Such recasting of ballot initiatives raises fundamental jurisprudential …

Accounting For Adolescents’ Twice Diminished Culpability In California’S Felony Murder Rule, Raychel Teasdale

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

In 2018, the California legislature passed S.B. 1437 to narrow California’s felony murder rule and theoretically apply the rule only to those with the greatest culpability in a murder. However, whether intentionally or negligently, the law leaves room to disproportionally and unjustly affect adolescents by charging those with “reckless indifference” with first-degree murder. Imbedded in psychology and neuroscience research is the conclusion that adolescent brain structure and function are still rapidly developing. As a result, adolescents are less able to weigh the risks of their actions, resist peer pressure, regulate their emotions, and control their impulses. Therefore, this Note argues …

Misdemeanors For All Purposes? Interpreting Proposition 47’S Ameliorative Scope In A New Era Of Criminal Justice Reform, Kayla Burchuk

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

In 2014, Proposition 47 reclassified seven low-level felonies to misdemeanors, demonstrating voters’ striking rejection of California’s historically punitive sentencing policies. This Note examines the recent wave of California Supreme Court jurisprudence interpreting Proposition 47 by exploring the court’s varied readings of the initiative’s ballot materials and statutory text. While the court has liberally construed relief for affected property crimes, it has responded ambivalently in more controversial areas such as drug offenses, mandatory parole periods, and automatic resentencing. This variation reveals ideological tensions between the goal of expanding ameliorative benefits to low-level offenders and anxiety regarding public safety. This Note analyzes …

The Future Of Bail In California: Analyzing Sb 10 Through The Prism Of Past Reforms, Adam Peterson

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The cash bail system is the cause of numerous injustices. It favors the rich over the poor, it packs jails to the breaking point, and it forces those who have yet to be found guilty to sit in jail—often for weeks or months at a time. In 2018, the California legislature passed SB 10. The bill purported to abolish cash bail wholesale and replace it with a risk assessment program. While SB 10 is a step in the right direction, it faces many obstacles before it accomplishes its goal. This Note examines the bill in light of past attempts at …

Burning A Hole In The Pocket Of Justice: Prop. 66'S Underfunded Attempt To Fix California's Death Penalty, Flavia Costea

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

California has struggled with the administrative and financial burdens of a flawed death penalty system for decades. In an effort to save the death penalty, the voters of California enacted Proposition 66, which promised to deliver a quicker and more cost-effective system. This Article focuses on the provision of Prop. 66 that expands the number of lawyers who can act as defense lawyers for inmates on death row. While this provision superficially seems to solve the shortage of defense attorneys willing to take on death penalty cases, without significant funding, the shortage of resources and pressure to speed up executions …

Property, Persons, And Institutionalized Police Interdiction In Byrd V. United States, Eric J. Miller

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

During a fairly routine traffic stop of a motorist driving a rental car, two State Troopers in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, discovered that the driver, Terrence Byrd, was not the listed renter. The Court ruled that Byrd nonetheless retained a Fourth Amendment right to object to the search. The Court did not address, however, why the Troopers stopped Byrd in the first place. A close examination of the case filings reveal suggests that Byrd was stopped on the basis of his race. The racial feature ofthe stop is obscured by the Court’s current property-basedinterpretation of the Fourth Amendment’s right to privacy.

Although …

Obscured Boundaries: Dimaya's Expansion Of The Void-For-Vagueness Doctrine, Katherine Brosamle

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

"It's Open Season At The Border": Why The Bivens Remedy Should Extend To U.S. Border Patrol Agents In Cross-Border Shootings, Samantha Garza

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Companion Animals Are More Than "Just" Personal Property: Oregon Supreme Court Joins Growing National Trend, Kathleen Simers

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Confrontation Clause: Employing The "Greatest Legal Engine Ever Invented For The Discovery Of Truth" To Promote Justice In Criminal Courts, Ani Oganesian

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fairness Over Finality: Peña-Rodriguez V. Colorado And The Right To An Impartial Jury, Katherine Brosamle

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Richards Ii Takes A Bite Out Of Forensic Science, Michelle Cornell-Davis

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Good Intentions, Unintended Consequences: How United States V. James Will Affect Federal Sexual Abuse Analysis, Kelsey Wong

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Making Room For Juvenile Justice: The Supreme Court's Decision In Montgomery V. Louisiana, Chelsea S. Gumaer

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Distorting Extortion: How Bribery And Extortion Became One And The Same Under The Hobbs Act, Sigourney Haylock

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Death Knell For The Death Penalty: Judge Carney's Order To Kill Capital Punishment Rings Loud Enough To Reach The Supreme Court, Alyssa Hughes

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prosecutorial Ventriloquism: People V. Tom And The Substantive Use Of Post-Arrest, Pre-Miranda Silence To Infer Consciousness Of Guilt, Joshua Bornstein

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Think Twice, It's All Right: The Use Of Conviction Histories In Hiring Decisions Under California Law, Arthur Four

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ignorance Of The Law Is No Excuse—Unless You’Re A Cop, Hannah Dunn

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Cerd-Ain" Reform: Dismantling The School-To-Prison Pipeline Through More Thorough Coordination Of The Departments Of Justice And Education, Lisa A. Rich

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

In the last year of his presidency, President Barack Obama and his administration have undertaken many initiatives to ensure that formerly incarcerated individuals have more opportunities to successfully reenter society. At the same time, the administration has been working on education policy that closes the achievement gap and slows the endless flow of juveniles into the school-to-prison pipeline. While certainly laudable, there is much more that can be undertaken collaboratively among executive branch agencies to end the school-to-prison pipeline and the endless cycle of people re-entering the criminal justice system.

This paper examines the rise of the school-to-prison pipeline through …