Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Post-conviction review (10)
- Evidence (8)
- Fourth amendment (8)
- Criminal procedure (4)
- Habeas corpus (4)
-
- Sentencing (4)
- Confrontation Clause (3)
- Criminal trial (3)
- De novo (3)
- Fifth Amendment (3)
- Law court (3)
- Miranda (3)
- Privilege (3)
- Search and seizure (3)
- Coffin lecture (2)
- Competency (2)
- Constitution (2)
- Constitutional (2)
- Constitutional law (2)
- Courts (2)
- Crime (2)
- Criminal appellate procedure (2)
- Criminal defendants (2)
- Criminal law and procedure (2)
- Criminal sanctions (2)
- Cruel and unusual punishment (2)
- Daubert (2)
- Deadline (2)
- Domestic Violence (2)
- Domestiv violence (2)
Articles 1 - 30 of 80
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Case For Second Chances: A Pathway To Decarceration In Maine, Catherine Besteman, Leo Hylton
The Case For Second Chances: A Pathway To Decarceration In Maine, Catherine Besteman, Leo Hylton
Maine Law Review
The Article argues that Maine incarcerates too many people, for too long, for too many things, at too great of an expense. We offer evidence to support this claim, briefly review some of the criminal legal legislation that shaped our present reality, and show how recent efforts at reform have been, at best, only modestly successful. In concert with a growing number of expert voices across the country calling for strategies of decarceration, our goal is to demonstrate the need for second chance legislation in Maine in the form of the reinstatement of parole, an effective clemency process, a far-reaching …
The New People V. Collins: How Can Probabilistic Evidence Be Properly Admitted?, David Crump
The New People V. Collins: How Can Probabilistic Evidence Be Properly Admitted?, David Crump
Maine Law Review
The California Supreme Court’s decision in People v. Collins is a staple in Evidence casebooks. An innovative assistant district attorney in the trial court had presented a mathematician who applied probabilities to questions about the perpetrators’ characteristics. The state supreme court disapproved the injection of an equation featuring what mathematicians call the “product rule.” The opinion contains thank-goodness-we-escaped-that-disaster reasoning and condemnation of this use of mathematics with probabilities. But the court’s analysis probably would be different if the case were decided today, as the “new” People v. Collins. Therefore, this Article considers what the author calls the new People v. …
Power V. Power: Federal Pattern-Or-Practice Enforcement Actions Applied To Local Prosecutors, Thomas P. Hogan
Power V. Power: Federal Pattern-Or-Practice Enforcement Actions Applied To Local Prosecutors, Thomas P. Hogan
Maine Law Review
One of the most powerful tools available to the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) to stop abuses in the criminal justice system is the federal pattern-or-practice statute, which allows DOJ to bring an enforcement action to prevent discriminatory conduct by government agencies. The most powerful actor in the criminal justice system is the district attorney, the local prosecutor who is at the center of the system. Does DOJ’s pattern-or-practice enforcement authority extend to local prosecutors? This crucial question remains unresolved in formal precedent and has not been addressed in the relevant literature. This Article explores the issue in detail, …
What's Love Got To Do With It? Redefining Domestic Violence To Close Federal Firearm Loopholes, Cecilia Shields-Auble
What's Love Got To Do With It? Redefining Domestic Violence To Close Federal Firearm Loopholes, Cecilia Shields-Auble
Maine Law Review
Closing the “boyfriend loophole” by expanding the definition of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence to include the abuse of “dating partners” further entrenches the law into an unworkable quasi-marital framework rooted in an antiquated understanding of domestic violence. The federal firearm prohibition would more effectively target high-risk offenders if 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(33)(A) were revised to eliminate the quasi-marital framework and reflect a modern understanding of the power and control dynamics involved in intimate partner violence. This Comment begins by summarizing the emergence of federal domestic violence law and describing the limitations of the Lautenberg Amendment. It then examines …
United States V. Safehouse: The Future Of Supervised Consumption Sites In Maine And Beyond, Jeff P. Sherman
United States V. Safehouse: The Future Of Supervised Consumption Sites In Maine And Beyond, Jeff P. Sherman
Maine Law Review
People who use drugs are dying at an unprecedented rate. However, many of these deaths can be prevented. When a person experiencing an opioid overdose is timely treated with naloxone and oxygen the overdose is reversed. Access to a supervised consumption site—a place where people can use pre-obtained drugs in the safety and presence of others—ensures that when a person overdoses, they receive this life-saving treatment. In response to a proposed supervised consumption site in Philadelphia, the Department of Justice sued to prevent it from opening. The government claimed that the facility, called “Safehouse,” would violate 21 U.S.C. § 856(a)(2) …
What's My Age Again?: Adolescent Development And The Case For Expanding Original Juvenile Court Jurisdiction And Investing In Alternatives For Emerging Adults Involved In Maine's Justice System, Christopher M. Northrop, Jill M. Ward, Jonathan J. Ruterbories, Jess N. Mizzi
What's My Age Again?: Adolescent Development And The Case For Expanding Original Juvenile Court Jurisdiction And Investing In Alternatives For Emerging Adults Involved In Maine's Justice System, Christopher M. Northrop, Jill M. Ward, Jonathan J. Ruterbories, Jess N. Mizzi
Maine Law Review
While many aspects of Maine’s Juvenile Justice system are ripe for reform, this Article advocates for improving the system’s response to one group of offenders often overlooked by policymakers: emerging adults. The Supreme Court, in Roper v. Simmons, stated that “[t]he qualities that distinguish juveniles from adults do not disappear when an individual turns 18.” In fact, studies have shown that criminal conduct attributable to the unstable and impulsive nature of the adolescent mind continues well into a person’s mid-twenties. These eighteen to twenty-five-year-old offenders, termed “emerging adults” by researchers, experience much of the same developmental and physiological challenges as …
Going Rogue: Independent Grand Juries Throughout America, Nino Monea
Going Rogue: Independent Grand Juries Throughout America, Nino Monea
Maine Law Review
Grand juries today do little more than passively approve (almost never disapprove) indictments proposed by prosecutors. But this stands in stark contrast to grand juries in the past. They investigated cases themselves and their purview went well beyond criminal matters. This Article looks in-depth at three historical cases where grand juries not only conducted major investigations but took on major additional roles. They ousted corrupt public officials, ran their cities in the interim, or booted prosecutors that failed to do their jobs. These examples demonstrate that grand juries in modern society could have a more robust role in the justice …
Wellman V. State: Confusing The Standard Of Excusable Neglect, Andrew L. Black
Wellman V. State: Confusing The Standard Of Excusable Neglect, Andrew L. Black
Maine Law Review
In Maine, as in most other states, a person convicted of a criminal offense is entitled to state post-conviction review upon proper filing of a petition. The Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure establish deadlines for such a filing and for the responsive answer by the State. Application for an enlargement of time in which to respond requires the State to show cause. If, however, the State makes this application after the initial period for response, the Rules impose a much stricter standard—a showing of “excusable neglect.” In Wellman v. State the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, …
State V. Violette: Harsher Resentencing Encounters A Bolder Resumption Of Vindictiveness, Thomas C. Bradley
State V. Violette: Harsher Resentencing Encounters A Bolder Resumption Of Vindictiveness, Thomas C. Bradley
Maine Law Review
Twenty-one years ago, in Weeks v. State, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, adopted a rule to prevent judicial vindictiveness when resentencing defendants who had successfully appealed their conviction and been reconvicted. The Weeks court adopted as a state due process protection the United States Supreme Court's rule laid down the preceding year in North Carolina v. Pearce. The Pearce rule provides that harsher resentencing of such defendants creates a presumption of constitutionally prohibited vindictiveness unless the harsher sentence is explicitly based on some identifiable misconduct by the defendant since the prior sentencing. Thus, the Law …
State V. Pinkham: Erosion Of Meaningful Forth Amendment Protection For Vehicle Stops In Maine?, Roger M. Clement Jr.
State V. Pinkham: Erosion Of Meaningful Forth Amendment Protection For Vehicle Stops In Maine?, Roger M. Clement Jr.
Maine Law Review
In State v. Pinkham, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, held that a police officer's stop of a motorist to inquire and advise about the motorist's improper-but not illegal-lane usage did not necessarily violate the Fourth Amendment's proscription against unreasonable seizures. The Pinkham decision is the first time that the Law Court has validated the stop of a moving vehicle in the absence of either a suspected violation of law or an imminent, ongoing threat to highway safety. This Note considers whether the Law Court was correct in sustaining the police officer's stop of Ronald Pinkham. …
Wellman V. State: Confusing The Standard Of Excusable Neglect, Andrew L. Black
Wellman V. State: Confusing The Standard Of Excusable Neglect, Andrew L. Black
Maine Law Review
In Maine, as in most other states, a person convicted of a criminal offense is entitled to state post-conviction review upon proper filing of a petition. The Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure establish deadlines for such a filing and for the responsive answer by the State. Application for an enlargement of time in which to respond requires the State to show cause. If, however, the State makes this application after the initial period for response, the Rules impose a much stricter standard—a showing of “excusable neglect.” In Wellman v. State the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, …
Please Stop: The Law Court's Recent Roadblock Decisions, Jonathan A. Block
Please Stop: The Law Court's Recent Roadblock Decisions, Jonathan A. Block
Maine Law Review
Police checkpoints or “roadblocks” have become an increasingly utilized law enforcement tool. At best, these checkpoints result in only a minor inconvenience to motorists. When abused, however, roadblocks have the potential for invidious invasions of privacy and personal freedom. Roadblocks are designed to deter, and to a lesser extent detect, criminal activity by stopping everyone—both the guilty and the law-abiding—for a brief inspection, thereby impinging to some degree on one's freedom of travel, privacy, and “right to be let alone.” Such “seizures” must be “reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment in order to survive constitutional challenge. The major difference between roadblocks …
One Step Forward, One Step Back: Emergency Reform And Appellate Sentence Review In Maine, Amy K. Tchao
One Step Forward, One Step Back: Emergency Reform And Appellate Sentence Review In Maine, Amy K. Tchao
Maine Law Review
Perhaps in no other area of the law is a trial court's power greater than when it is given the task of criminal sentencing. Historically and traditionally, the trial court judge has been given the widest latitude of discretion in determining a proper sentence once a criminal defendant has been found guilty. Indeed, the task of sentencing has been deemed a matter of discretion rather than a question of law. As a result, trial judges historically have not articulated reasons for the sentences that they impose. However, with very few standards or criteria to measure the appropriateness of their decisions, …
Gideon In The Desert: An Empirical Study Of Providing Counsel To Criminal Defendants In Rural Places, Andrew Davies, Alyssa Clark
Gideon In The Desert: An Empirical Study Of Providing Counsel To Criminal Defendants In Rural Places, Andrew Davies, Alyssa Clark
Maine Law Review
Access to counsel for criminal defendants is a continuing challenge in rural localities, notwithstanding the mandates of Sixth Amendment jurisprudence. In this Article, we first review the state of the law on access to counsel in criminal cases, noting the latitude allowed to state and local governments in their policy decisions. We then examine empirical approaches to measuring access to counsel and describe in detail both the law and the data on this issue from the state of Texas. We present exploratory analyses of those data comparing rural and urban places for various aspects of access to counsel, including rules …
Viewing Access To Justice For Rural Mainers Of Color Through A Prosecutorial Lens, Maybell Romero
Viewing Access To Justice For Rural Mainers Of Color Through A Prosecutorial Lens, Maybell Romero
Maine Law Review
Rural areas throughout the country, including those in Maine, are beginning to navigate the challenges and benefits of burgeoning communities of color. District Attorneys’ offices in the state, however, have done little to prepare for this major demographic shift. Maine district attorneys must expand their understanding of their duties to do justice and assure access to justice by better serving rural Mainers of color. While a number of scholars have focused on the legal challenges communities of color face in urban environments as well as those faced by what have been presumed to be White communities in rural areas, this …
When Should Force Directed Against A Police Officer Be Justified Under The Maine Criminal Code? - Toward A Coherent Theory Of Law Enforcement Under The Code's Justification Provision, F. Todd Lowell
Maine Law Review
In State v. Clisham, the Law Court unanimously found that section 104(1) of the Maine Criminal Code operated to justify the use of non-deadly force by a private citizen seeking to prevent an illegal search of his house by police officers. This Comment will focus on the justification provisions of the Maine Criminal Code as they relate to law enforcement practices and will examine how the Law Court's most recent decision interpreting one of the provisions affects that relationship. This Comment will argue that the policy underlying the justification provisions mandates that the justification defense be denied to persons responding …
Sniffing Out The Fourth Amendment: United States V. Place-Dog Sniffs-Ten Years Later, Hope Walker Hall
Sniffing Out The Fourth Amendment: United States V. Place-Dog Sniffs-Ten Years Later, Hope Walker Hall
Maine Law Review
In the endless and seemingly futile government war against drugs, protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution may have fallen by the wayside as courts struggle to deal with drug offenders. The compelling government interest in controlling the influx of drugs all too often results in a judicial attitude that the ends justify the means. Judges can be reluctant to exclude evidence of drugs found in an unlawful search pursuant to the exclusionary rule, which provides that illegally obtained evidence may not be used at trial. The exclusion of drugs as evidence in drug cases often …
Confronting Silence: The Constitution, Deaf Criminal Defendants, And The Right To Interpretation During Trial, Deirdre M. Smith
Confronting Silence: The Constitution, Deaf Criminal Defendants, And The Right To Interpretation During Trial, Deirdre M. Smith
Maine Law Review
For most deaf people, interactions with the hearing community in the absence of interpretation or technological assistance consist of communications that are, at most, only partly comprehensible. Criminal proceedings, with the defendant's liberty interest directly at stake, are occasions in which the need for deaf people to have a full understanding of what is said and done around them is most urgent. Ironically, the legal “right to interpretation” has not been clearly defined in either statutory or case law. Although the federal and state constitutions do not provide a separate or lesser set of rights for deaf defendants, their situation …
Termination Of Hospital Medical Staff Privileges For Economic Reasons: An Appeal For Consistency, June D. Zellers, Michael R. Poulin
Termination Of Hospital Medical Staff Privileges For Economic Reasons: An Appeal For Consistency, June D. Zellers, Michael R. Poulin
Maine Law Review
The relationship between physicians and hospitals is undergoing significant change. Historically, a physician maintained a private practice in the community and looked to the local hospital for ancillary support when his or her patients were too ill to remain at home. This community-based physician gained access to the hospital by obtaining medical staff privileges. These privileges allowed the physician to admit patients to the hospital, treat patients while they were there, and use the hospital's staff and equipment. The physician generally enjoyed the use of the privileges throughout his or her active career, losing them only if found incompetent. Today, …
Life After Daubert V. Merrell Dow: Maine As A Case Law Laboratory For Evidence Rule 702 Without Frye, Leigh Stephens Mccarthy
Life After Daubert V. Merrell Dow: Maine As A Case Law Laboratory For Evidence Rule 702 Without Frye, Leigh Stephens Mccarthy
Maine Law Review
In reaching its recent decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the United States Supreme Court grappled not with case law but with fundamental questions about the nature of science and its role in law. The court in Daubert addressed the problematic issue of admissibility of expert scientific testimony. In the end the Court rejected as an exclusionary rule the venerable standard set in 1923 by Frye v. United States. Frye held that scientific testimony was to be excluded unless it had gained “general acceptance” in its field. Daubert held that Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence …
Prosecutorial Summation: Where Is The Line Between "Personal Opinion" And Proper Argument?, James W. Gunson
Prosecutorial Summation: Where Is The Line Between "Personal Opinion" And Proper Argument?, James W. Gunson
Maine Law Review
Prosecutorial forensic misconduct has become front page news in Maine. Since April of 1993, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, has reversed convictions in three highly publicized cases based on remarks made by the prosecutor. In State v. Steen, the prosecutor asked the defendant to give his opinion concerning the veracity of other witnesses and suggested in closing argument that the favorable testimony given by the defense's expert witness resulted from the fee he had received. The Law Court vacated the gross sexual assault conviction, finding that the prosecutor's questions and closing argument “clearly suggested” to …
State V. Nelson: Determining "Reasonable Suspicion" For Investigatory Stops In Maine, Sandra Denison Shannon
State V. Nelson: Determining "Reasonable Suspicion" For Investigatory Stops In Maine, Sandra Denison Shannon
Maine Law Review
In 1994 the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, held in State v. Nelson that a police officer's observation of motorist Theodore Nelson consuming a single can of beer over a one-hour time period did not, by itself, give rise to a reasonable suspicion that Nelson thereafter illegally operated the vehicle under the influence of alcohol. This Note analyzes the Law Court's decision in Nelson. In its analysis, this Note compares Nelson to several other Maine opinions and recommends that, if the Maine Law Court is to continue to adhere to both objective and subjective standards in …
Trammel V. United States: Bad History, Bad Policy, And Bad Law, Michael W. Mullane
Trammel V. United States: Bad History, Bad Policy, And Bad Law, Michael W. Mullane
Maine Law Review
In 1980 the United States Supreme Court decided Trammel v. United States. The opinion changed the Spouses' Testimonial Privilege, overturning centuries of consistent case decisions. The Court based its decision on the history and effect of privilege and a straw poll of state legislative and court decisions on the issue. The Court concluded its decision would permit the admission of more spousal testimony without impairing the benefits the privilege was supposed to confer on spouses. The Court's decision in Trammel was wrong on three counts. The first was bad history overlaid with questionable analysis. The survey of the state's treatment …
Justice Edward Godfrey And The Role Of The Trial Judge In The Criminal Process, Melvyn H. Zarr University Of Maine School Of Law
Justice Edward Godfrey And The Role Of The Trial Judge In The Criminal Process, Melvyn H. Zarr University Of Maine School Of Law
Maine Law Review
At the end of 1994 Dean Edward S. Godfrey III stepped down from his teaching position as Professor Emeritus of the University of Maine School of Law. In honor of his service to Maine’s only law school, to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, to the Maine Bar, and to the people of the State of Maine, the Board and Staff dedicate Volume 47 of the Maine Law Review to Dean Edward Godfrey. Reviews by Maine Law School faculty members of Dean Godfrey’s Law Court decisions in several areas of the law follow.
Department Of Corrections V. Superior Court: Hear No Evil, Aaron T. Morel
Department Of Corrections V. Superior Court: Hear No Evil, Aaron T. Morel
Maine Law Review
On December 9, 1991, professional ethical and moral considerations prompted heated litigation in Department of Corrections v. Superior Court. Justice Donald G. Alexander of Maine's Superior Court displayed considerable foresight while sentencing two borderline mentally retarded child sex offenders. Although both defendants had committed repugnant crimes, Justice Alexander anticipated that they would be subjected to impermissible abuse if incarcerated in the Department of Corrections. He believed that preventive measures were necessary to ensure the safety of the defendants being sentenced and to avoid the potential that conditions of their incarceration would amount to cruel and unusual punishment. Justice Alexander subsequently …
Basic Trial Advocacy, Michael W. Mullane
Basic Trial Advocacy, Michael W. Mullane
Maine Law Review
Mary Crates taught me to “begin as you mean to go on.” Peter Murray's book is a good place to begin for those embarking on a life of trial advocacy. For those of us whose beginnings are distant and often painful memories, it is an excellent reminder of where we meant to go. Trial advocacy is an infinitely complex task. This simple fact is both its joy and curse. Teaching trial advocacy is equally difficult. There is no “never” and no “always.” There is a host of commonly accepted maxims, many of which are contradictory on their face and all …
A Measure Of Our Justice System: A Look At Maine's Indigent Criminal Defense Delivery System, Ronald W. Schneider Jr.
A Measure Of Our Justice System: A Look At Maine's Indigent Criminal Defense Delivery System, Ronald W. Schneider Jr.
Maine Law Review
This Comment will examine briefly the history of the right to counsel and the accompanying right to the effective assistance of counsel in this country. At the time the Sixth Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights, the United States rejected the English practice of denying the right to counsel to those accused of felonies while granting the right to those charged with misdemeanors. People in the United States have enjoyed the right to counsel in all criminal cases, felonies and misdemeanors, since 1791. Yet in a very real and dangerous sense, the courts have reversed the course of …
Race And The Federal Criminal Justice System: A Look At The Issue Of Selective Prosecution, Drew S. Days Iii
Race And The Federal Criminal Justice System: A Look At The Issue Of Selective Prosecution, Drew S. Days Iii
Maine Law Review
The Fourth Annual Frank M. Coffin Lecture on Law and Public Service was held on September 13, 1995. Following Dean Donald Zillman's opening remarks, The Honorable Drew S. Days III, Solicitor General of the United States, presented “Race and the Federal Criminal Justice System: A Look at the Issue of Selective Prosecution.” The Board and Staff of Volume 48 are honored to publish his remarks in their entirety.
Whren V. United States: An Abrupt End To The Debate Over Pretextual Stops, Brian J. O'Donnell
Whren V. United States: An Abrupt End To The Debate Over Pretextual Stops, Brian J. O'Donnell
Maine Law Review
In Whren v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that a traffic stop is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment if a police officer has probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred, even if the stop is a pretext for the investigation of a more serious offense. The Court affirmed the convictions of Michael A. Whren and James L. Brown, who had been arrested on federal drug charges after Washington, D.C., police stopped Brown for minor traffic infractions. The Court's unanimous opinion, delivered by Justice Scalia, brought an end to a long-running debate over the proper …
A Call For Consistency: State V. Caouette Is No Longer Viable In Light Of Colorado V. Connelly And State V. Eastman, Donald W. Macomber
A Call For Consistency: State V. Caouette Is No Longer Viable In Light Of Colorado V. Connelly And State V. Eastman, Donald W. Macomber
Maine Law Review
This Article challenges the Law Court's expansive interpretation in State v. Caouette of the scope of the privilege against self-incrimination embodied in Article I, section 6 of the Maine Constitution in the context of reviewing claims of the involuntariness of a confession. The court's declaration that a reliable confession must be suppressed on state constitutional grounds based solely on a suspect's internal factors, and in the absence of any police overreaching in obtaining the confession, contradicted two centuries of constitutional jurisprudence requiring some form of government action to implicate the protections of the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of …