Law Commons^™

Cyberterrorism And The Public Safety Exception To Miranda, Mitch Snyder

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Cyberattacks against U.S. targets are becoming increasingly common. To effectively combat these attacks, law enforcement officers need the tools to respond to and prevent cyberattacks before they can occur.

In recent years, hackers have launched cyberattacks against infrastructural targets such as power grids, oil and gas distribution computer systems, and telecommunications networks. Cyberattacks have also targeted U.S. government websites, including the U.S. Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Treasury. Recently, a cyberattack against SolarWinds, a Texas-based I.T. company, compromised the computer and network systems of federal, state, and local governments; critical infrastructure entities; and other private sector organizations. …

Analyzing Wrongful Convictions Beyond The Traditional Canonical List Of Errors, For Enduring Structural And Sociological Attributes, (Juveniles, Racism, Adversary System, Policing Policies), Leona D. Jochnowitz, Tonya Kendall

Touro Law Review

Researchers identify possible structural causes for wrongful convictions: racism, justice system culture, adversary system, plea bargaining, media, juvenile and mentally impaired accused, and wars on drugs and crime. They indicate that unless the root causes of conviction error are identified, the routine explanations of error (e.g., eyewitness identifications; false confessions) will continue to re-occur. Identifying structural problems may help to prevent future wrongful convictions. The research involves the coding of archival data from the Innocence Project for seventeen cases, including the one for the Central Park Five exonerees. The data were coded by Hartwick College and Northern Vermont University students …

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.

Where The Constitution Falls Short: Confession Admissibility And Police Regulation, Courtney E. Lewis

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

A confession presented at trial is one of the most damning pieces of evidence against a criminal defendant, which means that the rules governing its admissibility are critical. At the outset of confession admissibility in the United States, the judiciary focused on a confession’s truthfulness. Culminating in the landmark case Miranda v. Arizona, judicial concern with the reliability of confessions shifted away from whether a confession was true and towards curtailing unconstitutional police misconduct. Post-hoc constitutionality review, however, is arguably inappropriate. Such review is inappropriate largely because the reviewing court must find that the confession was voluntary only by …

Extending Miranda: Prohibition On Police Lies Regarding The Incriminating Evidence, Rinat Kitai-Sangero

San Diego Law Review

This Article addresses the question of whether lying to suspects during interrogations regarding the incriminating evidence against them is a legitimate deceit. The search for truth goes hand-in-hand with the human yearning for knowledge. Generally, lying is perceived as reprehensible. Certain types of lies, such as those concerning medical treatment or the sale of a house, may even result in civil or criminal liability. Despite the condemnation of lying, lying to suspects during interrogations is a common phenomenon, and has even been dubbed an “art.” Part II of the article presents how police use deceit and lies during interrogations in …

The Law Court's Proper Application Of Miranda In State V. Bragg: A "Matter-Of-Fact Communication" To The Defendant Regarding Evidence Against Him Will Not Typically Constitute "Interrogation", Stephen B. Segal

Maine Law Review

In State v. Bragg, Tammy Bragg was convicted of a Class D crime for operating under the influence (OUI) at the completion of a jury trial, and was ordered to pay a fine of $800 and her license was suspended for ninety days. During her trial, Bragg submitted a motion to suppress statements she made in the police officer’s vehicle and the police station on the grounds that she was not read her Miranda warnings prior to making the statements. The Superior Court denied her motion, however, concluding that Miranda warnings were not necessary in the officer’s vehicle because her …

What Constitutes "Custody" Under Miranda?: An Examination Of Maine's Test As Applied In State V. Kittredge, Elizabeth L. Tull

Maine Law Review

In recent years, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, has issued several opinions addressing whether a defendant’s statements are admissible when made to law enforcement in the absence of “Miranda warnings.” These cases have similar features: a defendant made a personally incriminating statement; raised an appeal arguing that Miranda warnings should have been, but were not, read to him or her; and the Court—in many cases—determined that the defendant was not technically in police custody, and thus there was no requirement to recite Miranda warnings to him or her. Miranda warnings are an important safeguard that …

State V. Lovejoy: Should Pre-Arrest, Pre-Miranda Silence Be Admissible During The State's Case-In-Chief As Substantive Evidence Of Guilt?, Mark A. Rucci

Maine Law Review

Article 1, section 6 of Maine Constitution reads in part that “[t]he accused shall not be compelled to give evidence against himself or herself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, property, or privileges . . . .” Further, the Law Court has held that “the State constitutional protection against self-incrimination is the equivalent of the Fifth Amendment." However, as with most provisions of the Constitution, the protection against self-incrimination is open to interpretation. While the Supreme Court has answered some questions surrounding the Fifth Amendment’s protections, it has left many decisions regarding its scope largely within the purview of the …

Revisiting The Public Safety Exception To Miranda For Suspected Terrorists: Dzhokhar Tsarnaev And The Bombing Of The 2013 Boston Marathon, Hannah Lonky

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

This Comment examines the application of the public safety exception to Miranda to cases of domestic terrorism, looking particularly at the case of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing. By comparing the Department of Justice’s War on Terror policies to the Warren Court’s rationale for Miranda, this Comment argues that courts should require law enforcement officers to have reasonable knowledge of an immediate threat to public safety before they may properly invoke the Quarles public safety exception.

Moving Beyond Miranda: Concessions For Confessions, Scott W. Howe

Northwestern University Law Review

The law governing police interrogation provides perverse incentives. For criminal suspects, the law rewards obstruction and concealment. For police officers, it honors deceit and psychological aggression. For the courts and the rest of us, it encourages blindness and rationalization. This Article contends that the law could help foster better behaviors. The law could incentivize criminals to confess without police trickery and oppression. It could motivate police officers involved in obtaining suspect statements to avoid chicanery and duress. And, it could summon courts and the rest of us to speak more truthfully about whether suspect admissions are the product of informed, …

Shakin' And Bakin': The Supreme Court's Remarkable Criminal Law Rulings Of The 1999 Term, William E. Hellerstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Policing In The Era Of Permissiveness: Mitigating Misconduct Through Third-Party Standing, Julian A. Cook Iii

Brooklyn Law Review

On April 4, 2015, Walter L. Scott was driving his vehicle when he was stopped by Officer Michael T. Slager of the North Charleston, South Carolina, police department for a broken taillight. A dash cam video from the officer’s vehicle showed the two men engaged in what appeared to be a rather routine verbal exchange. Sometime after Slager returned to his vehicle, Scott exited his car and ran away from Slager, prompting the officer to pursue him on foot. After he caught up with Scott in a grassy field near a muffler establishment, a scuffle between the men ensued, purportedly …

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.

Confessions, Miranda's Applicability; Clewis V. Texas, Howard E. Mentzer

Akron Law Review

Recent United States Supreme Court decisions concerning the admissibility of statements or confessions into evidence have sharply curtailed haphazard interrogation procedures. As courts have become more punctilious about "due process" and other constitutional guarantees, a greater degree of care and fairness has been demanded in soliciting information and advising uninformed individuals of their rights.

Evidence - Admissibility Of Statements To Parole Officer - Miranda Warnings; State V. Gallagher, Thomas A. Treadon

Akron Law Review

The opinion handed down in this recent decision from the Montgomery County Court of Appeals examined a question of first impression in the courts of Ohio. The issue presented was "whether a parole or probation officer is a law enforcement officer within the contemplation of Miranda and thus subject to the Miranda requirements of constitutional warnings to suspects during custodial interrogation...."

Escobedo And Miranda Revisited, Arthur J. Goldberg

Akron Law Review

Shortly before the close of the 1983 term, the Supreme Court of the United States decided two cases, U.S. v. Gouveia and New York v. Quarles, which in effect overruled Escobedo v. Illinois and undermined Miranda v. Arizona.

Mirandizing Terrorism Suspects? The Public Safety Exception, The Rescue Doctrine, And Implicit Analogies To Self-Defense, Defense Of Others, And Battered Woman Syndrome, Bruce Ching

Catholic University Law Review

In its 1984 decision New York v. Quarles, the Supreme Court announced the public safety exception, under which statements made by un-Mirandized suspects can be admissible when made in response to questions reasonably asked to protect the safety of the arresting officers or the general public. During the investigation of terrorism cases, law enforcement agencies have begun to extend the time of un-Mirandized questioning of suspects, with the hope that courts will find that the public safety exception makes the suspects’ statements admissible in the ensuing prosecutions.

This Article argues that in announcing the public safety exception, …

Interrogation Policies, Brandon L. Garrett

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States V. Patane: The Beginning Of The End Of Miranda, Bryce Chauncey Loveland

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court, Kings County, People V. Miller, Courtney Weinberger

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Sanctity Of The Attorney-Client Relationship – Undermined By The Federal Interpretation Of The Right To Counsel - People V. Borukhova, Tara Laterza

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trial Error Blunder: Compounded Use Of Defendant’S Post-Arrest Silence For Impeachment And Summation Purposes Is Not Harmless - People V. Tucker, Robert Mitchell

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure: New York Vs. Federal Approach - People V. Keita, Tillie S. Mirman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

It’S In The Bag: Voluntariness, Scope, And The Authority To Grant Consent - United States V. Harris, Daniel Fier

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

High Expectations And Some Wounded Hopes: The Policy And Politics Of A Uniform Statute On Videotaping Custodial Interrogations, Andrew E. Taslitz

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

Much has been written about the need to videotape the entire process of police interrogation of suspects. Videotaping discourages abusive interrogation techniques, improves police training in proper techniques, reduces frivolous suppression motions, and improves jury decision making about the voluntariness and accuracy of a confession. Despite these benefits, only a small number of states have adopted legislation mandating electronic recording of the entire interrogation process. In the hope of accelerating legislative adoption of this procedure and of improving the quality of such legislation, the Uniform Law Commission (ULC) ratified a uniform recording statute for consideration by the states. I was …

Coming Clean: The Erosion Of Juvenile Miranda Rights In New York State, Justin Ashenfelter

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Exonerating The Innocent: Pretrial Innocence Procedures, Tim Bakken, Lewis M. Steel

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Convicting Lennie: Mental Retardation, Wrongful Convictions, And The Right To A Fair Trial, John H. Blume, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Susan E. Millor

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Rise And Fall Of The Miranda Warnings In Popular Culture, Ronald Steiner, Rebecca Bauer, Rohit Talwar

Cleveland State Law Review

While Dickerson's rationale is certainly correct in presuming that those over thirty have already learned about the Miranda warning from decades of television, younger generations only have today's Miranda-less programming on which to form their assumptions about law enforcement. Miranda can still be found on television, but its presence has severely diminished over the years. If this trend continues, how will America's current youth internalize the Miranda warning in the way older generations have? Near-universal awareness of Miranda is an artifact of a shared popular culture in which the repetition of the warnings was pervasive and inescapable. But how can …

Criminal Law And Procedure, Virginia B. Theisen, Stephen R. Mccullough

University of Richmond Law Review

The authors have endeavored to select from the many cases and bills those that have the most significant practical impact on the daily practice of criminal law in the Commonwealth. Due to space constraints, the authors have stayed away from discussing settled principles, with a focus on the "take away" for a particular case.