Law Commons^™

Conventions And Convictions: A Valuative Theory Of Punishment, Daniel Maggen

Utah Law Review

The one thing that most scholars of criminal law agree upon is that we are in desperate need of a comprehensive theory of punishment. The theory that comes closest to meeting this demand is the expressive account of punishment, yet it is often criticized for its inability to explain how the expression of communal values justifies punishment and why the condemnation of wrongdoing necessarily requires punishment. The Article answers these criticisms by arguing against the need to necessarily connect punishment to wrongdoing and by developing expressivism into a novel theory of punishment, grounded in the valuative function punishment serves.

Offering …

Bucklew V. Precythe : Brief Of Arizona Voice For Crime Victims, Inc., And Melissa Sanders As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Paul Cassell, Allyson N. Ho, Daniel Nowicki, Daniel Chen

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

This amicus brief in Bucklew v. Precythe discusses how undue delay in capital cases can harm crime victims’ families. After reviewing the facts of the cases, the brief draws on the available scholarship to show how extended delays in criminal cases – and particularly death penalty cases – can compound the harms and exacerbate the trauma that victims’ families suffer. The brief concludes that the important interests of victims should be vindicated by affirming the judgment reached below.

Criminalizing Battered Mothers, Courtney Cross

Utah Law Review

How a domestic violence survivor responds to the abuse she is experiencing depends on many factors. Some critical considerations include her access to resources, desire to stay in her relationship, and assessment of her own safety. Criminal and civil court systems place enormous pressure on survivors to separate from their abusive partners. Not only are survivors with children pressured to leave, they are punished when they stay. That punishment can come in any combination of diminished custody rights, limited parental rights, and incarceration. Yet a survivor who flees with her children is not immune to these same consequences: if she …

The History Of Misdemeanor Bail, Shima Baughman

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Bail is one of the most consequential decisions in criminal justice. The ability to secure bail often makes the difference between guilt and innocence, retaining employment and family obligations, and keeping a place to live. These implications affect those charged with felonies and this has been the focus for many years, but it affects even more so those charged with misdemeanors. A misdemeanor is theoretically a less serious crime with less serious consequences, but the effects on a defendant’s life are just as serious in the short term. There is a growing body of important empirical work that demonstrates the …

Costs Of Pretrial Detention, Shima Baughman

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Spending on U.S. incarceration has increased dramatically over the last several decades. Much of this cost is on incarcerating pretrial detainees—inmates not convicted of a crime—which constitute the majority of individuals in our nation’s jails. Current statutory schemes give judges almost complete discretion to order pretrial detention based on unexplained or unidentified factors. With this discretion, judges tend to make inconsistent decisions in every jurisdiction, some releasing almost all defendants—including the most dangerous—and others detaining most defendants—even those who are safe to release. There are constitutional and moral reasons to evaluate our current detention scheme, but even the fiscal impact …

Subconstitutional Checks, Shima Baradaran Baughman

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Constitutional checks are an important part of the American justice system. The Constitution demands structural checks where it provides commensurate power. The Constitution includes several explicit checks in criminal law. Criminal defendants have rights to counsel, indictment by grand jury, and trial by jury; the public or executive elects or appoints prosecutors; legislatures limit actions of police and prosecutors; and courts enforce individual constitutional rights and stop executive misconduct. However, these checks have rarely functioned as intended because the Constitution and criminal law have failed to create—what I call—“subconstitutional checks” to adapt to the changes of the modern criminal state. …