Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- File Type
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Admissibility Of Co-Conspirator Statements In A Post-Crawford World, Michael L. Seigel, Daniel Weisman
Admissibility Of Co-Conspirator Statements In A Post-Crawford World, Michael L. Seigel, Daniel Weisman
Michael L Seigel
This Article takes the position that co-conspirator statements must be examined on a case-by-case basis to determine whether they are testimonial and thus subject to exclusion under the Confrontation Clause. Further, in light of the fact that the author of the majority opinions in Crawford and Davis was Justice Antonin Scalia, this Article examines whether interpreting the Sixth Amendment as a bar to the admission of certain coconspirator statements would violate an originalist interpretation of that provision. The conclusion reached is that it would not. In the current era of ever-narrowing rights for criminal defendants, reaffirming the law's commitment to …
Gay Panic And The Case For Gay Shield Laws, Kelly Strader, Molly Selvin, Lindsey Hay
Gay Panic And The Case For Gay Shield Laws, Kelly Strader, Molly Selvin, Lindsey Hay
Kelly Strader
In a highly publicized “gay panic” case, Brandon McInerney shot and killed Larry King in their middle school classroom. King was a self-identified gay student who sometimes wore jewelry and makeup to school and, according to those who knew him, was possibly transgender. Tried as an adult for first-degree murder, McInerney asserted a heat of passion defense based upon King’s alleged sexual advances. The jury deadlocked, with a majority accepting McInerney’s defense. Drawing largely upon qualitative empirical research, this article uses the Larry King murder case as a prism though which to view the doctrinal, theoretical, and policy bases of …
Government Denial Under Oath – Hidta, Hemisphere And Parallel Construction, Robert Sanger
Government Denial Under Oath – Hidta, Hemisphere And Parallel Construction, Robert Sanger
Robert M. Sanger
In September of last year, the New York Times reported on a remarkable program of the United States Government that involved spying on domestic phone records without a warrant.1 The news had a limited independent impact as it seemed to be lost in the disclosures of Michael Snowden regarding the National Security Administration (NSA), which purportedly was aimed at foreign terrorists but also included domestic targets. Yet, this program, called “Hemisphere,” was authorized by the Office of the President of the United States, Office of Drug Control Policy, under the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Program (HIDTA) and it primarily …
Shredded Fish,, Robert Sanger
Shredded Fish,, Robert Sanger
Robert M. Sanger
There are just too many criminal laws and their proliferation has expanded exponentially over the last few decades. This is overcriminalization. In addition, the jurisdiction of federal authorities under general or vague laws has vastly expanded federal criminal prosecution of people and organizations for what otherwise would not be a crime. This is overfederalization and overcriminalization. In this article we will look at the current litigation before the United States Supreme Court that had directly taken on this controversy. The case of Yates v. United States involves briefing by the parties and by amici curae directly invoking and defending the …
Discretion Abused: Reinterpreting The Appellate Standard Of Review For Hearsay, Matthew J. Peterson
Discretion Abused: Reinterpreting The Appellate Standard Of Review For Hearsay, Matthew J. Peterson
Matthew J. Peterson
Matthew J. Peterson, Discretion Abused: Reinterpreting the Appellate Standard of Review for Hearsay
Abstract:
The decision by a federal a court to exclude or admit hearsay can be crucial to the case of either party. Despite this prospective impact, the federal courts of appeal currently defer to district courts’ expertise by reviewing a district court’s decision to admit or exclude hearsay for an abuse of discretion. Such deference often insulates district courts’ incorrect interpretation of the rule against hearsay and the improper application of the exclusions and exceptions to the rule from appellate reversal.
Lowering the standard of review for …
Rationality, Insanity, And The Insanity Defense: Reflections On The Limits Of Reason, Theodore Y. Blumoff
Rationality, Insanity, And The Insanity Defense: Reflections On The Limits Of Reason, Theodore Y. Blumoff
Theodore Y. Blumoff
Individuals who suffer from chronic paranoid ideations live with deeply embedded conspiratorial delusions that are sometimes accompanied by unwanted visual and/or auditory stimuli, sometime neither: just psychotic delusions in which they feel as if they have lost control of their lives – and of course they have, albeit not from the performances of foreign forces. When those perceived forces persevere for even a fairly short period of time, they can dictate the performance of evil deeds that the individual ultimately feels helpless to oppose. What observations and findings from neuroscience make clear is that such individuals do not lack knowledge, …
Finding The Foregone Conclusions Of Encryption, Timothy A. Wiseman
Finding The Foregone Conclusions Of Encryption, Timothy A. Wiseman
Timothy A Wiseman
Encryption is commonly used to protect private information, for both legitimate and illegitimate reasons. Courts have been struggling to determine when, within the bounds of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, the Courts may compel a defendant in a criminal case to decrypt their data.
This article argues that a broad use of the Forgone Conclusion doctrine would permit the Courts to order a defendant to decrypt their data when the prosecution can show with reasonable particularity the existence and location of the encrypted documents, that they are likely to be incriminating, and that the government can authenticate them without the …
The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination In Bankruptcy And The Plight Of The Debtor, Timothy R. Tarvin
The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination In Bankruptcy And The Plight Of The Debtor, Timothy R. Tarvin
Timothy R Tarvin
Back To The Future: The Constitution Requires Reasonableness And Particularity—Introducing The “Seize But Don’T Search” Doctrine, Adam Lamparello, Charles E. Maclean
Back To The Future: The Constitution Requires Reasonableness And Particularity—Introducing The “Seize But Don’T Search” Doctrine, Adam Lamparello, Charles E. Maclean
Adam Lamparello
Issuing one-hundred or fewer opinions per year, the United States Supreme Court cannot keep pace with opinions that match technological advancement. As a result, in Riley v. California and United States v. Wurie, the Court needs to announce a broader principle that protects privacy in the digital age. That principle, what we call “seize but don’t search,” recognizes that the constitutional touchstone for all searches is reasonableness.
When do present-day circumstances—the evolution in the Government’s surveillance capabilities, citizens’ phone habits, and the relationship between the NSA and telecom companies—become so thoroughly unlike those considered by the Supreme Court thirty-four years …
A Scientific Approach To Scientific Evidence: A Four-Stage Rule For Admissibility And Scope, Robert Sanger
A Scientific Approach To Scientific Evidence: A Four-Stage Rule For Admissibility And Scope, Robert Sanger
Robert M. Sanger
Scientific or expert testimony is often critical in criminal cases. The Supreme Court has established that the trial judge is the "gatekeeper" who is to determine what evidence is allowed before the jury. The current rules of evidence are not organized in a way that makes this task readily intelligible. This chapter proposes a more direct our-step process to accomplish the gatekeeping function.
Brady Reconstructed: An Overdue Expansion Of Rights And Remedies, Leonard Sosnov
Brady Reconstructed: An Overdue Expansion Of Rights And Remedies, Leonard Sosnov
Leonard N Sosnov
Over fifty years ago, the Supreme Court held in Brady v Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), that the Due Process Clause requires prosecutors to disclose materially favorable evidence to the defense. The Brady Court emphasized the need to treat all defendants fairly and to provide each accused with a meaningful opportunity to present a defense. While Brady held great promise for defendants to receive fundamentally fair access to evidence, the subsequent decisions of the Court have fallen short of meeting this promise.
Since Brady, the Court has limited the disclosure obligation by failing to separately determine rights and remedies. Additionally, …