Law Commons^™

Disciplinary Segregation: How The Punitive Solitary Confinement Policy In Federal Prisons Violates The Due Process Clause Of The Fifth Amendment In Spite Of Sandin V. Conner, Grant Henderson

Marquette Law Review

In 1995, the Supreme Court decided Sandin v. Connor, which held inmates did not have a protected liberty interest requiring due process before being placed in solitary confinement. With the increasing problems in the criminal justice systems nationwide, or perhaps a renewed interest in those problems, the public has turned its attention to the plight of the incarcerated. This Comment seeks to flush out the reasoning the Court provided in Sandin and understand the impacts of the “atypical and significant hardship” on subsequent prisoner litigation, chiefly involving solitary confinement. Following the legal analysis of cases, this Comment will view …

The Incompatibility Of Due Process And Naked Statistical Evidence, G. Alexander Nunn

Faculty Scholarship

Numerous articles and commentaries have grappled with an undeniable feeling of injustice that comes from wrestling with naked statistical evidence. Even if, from a purely quantitative standpoint, the weight of the evidence supports the imposition of liability on a defendant, the sole use of probabilities to assess this liability seems innately unfair. This tension has spawned a great debate that questions the role of naked statistical evidence in today’s legal system. Contributing to this discourse, this Note argues that, in certain circumstances, the use of naked statistical evidence constitutes a due process violation. United States circuit courts have held that …

Suspicious Person Ordinances - Due Process Standards; Columbus V. Thompson, Joel R. Campbell

Akron Law Review

In the absence of circumstances involving First Amendment rights, we are left without guidelines as to the conduct which may be made criminal by local suspicious person ordinances. Because of this lack of adequate standards, a case by case determination of criminal conduct under the various ordinances is necessary. In Thompson the defendant's conduct was questionable and the court found the ordinance unconstitutionally vague. We can only hope that this decision has a sufficient impact upon law enforcement officials and local courts to minimize the injury resulting from vagueness.

Suspicious Person Ordinances - Due Process Standards; Columbus V. Thompson, Joel R. Campbell

Akron Law Review

In the absence of circumstances involving First Amendment rights, we are left without guidelines as to the conduct which may be made criminal by local suspicious person ordinances. Because of this lack of adequate standards, a case by case determination of criminal conduct under the various ordinances is necessary. In Thompson the defendant's conduct was questionable and the court found the ordinance unconstitutionally vague. We can only hope that this decision has a sufficient impact upon law enforcement officials and local courts to minimize the injury resulting from vagueness.

Book Review: Psychiatric Justice, Alice M. Batchelder

Akron Law Review

In an era in which extensive judicial emphasis has been placed on "due process of law" in criminal proceedings, both in the federal courts and in the state courts, Dr. Szasz's book serves as a jarring reminder that in at least one vital area of the concept of due process, much remains to be done. The emerging definition of due process has enunciated the rights guaranteed the individual by the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments; and viewed within that framework, this book, although published in 1965, remains particularly timely, for Szasz, speaking as a psychiatrist, endeavors to demonstrate how …

Rights Of State Prisoners - Federal Court Intervention In State Prison Administration; Jones V. Wittenberg, Ronald L. Collins

Akron Law Review

The path to federal court intervention into state prison administration has been a tortuous and rocky one.... Jones v. Wittenberg carries federal court intervention into state prison administration to new lengths. Until more basic and lasting changes are made on the part of society and the states, such intervention seems to be the best chance for ameliorating conditions in our state penal systems.

The Involuntary Confession And The Right To Due Process: Is A Criminal Defendant Better Protected In The Federal Courts Than In Ohio?, Barbara Child

Akron Law Review

OHIO CIVIL LIBERTARIANS have long claimed that a criminal defendant is likely to have his due process rights better protected in the federal courts than in Ohio courts. One measure of that protection is how the courts respond when a defendant alleges that his confession was involuntary and thus not properly admissible as evidence at his trial. The central issue then is whether the Ohio courts have kept as much in step with the United States Supreme Court as have the federal courts in their revisions of what is the proper test of voluntariness of a confession.

The Involuntary Confession And The Right To Due Process: Is A Criminal Defendant Better Protected In The Federal Courts Than In Ohio?, Barbara Child

Akron Law Review

OHIO CIVIL LIBERTARIANS have long claimed that a criminal defendant is likely to have his due process rights better protected in the federal courts than in Ohio courts. One measure of that protection is how the courts respond when a defendant alleges that his confession was involuntary and thus not properly admissible as evidence at his trial. The central issue then is whether the Ohio courts have kept as much in step with the United States Supreme Court as have the federal courts in their revisions of what is the proper test of voluntariness of a confession.

Affirmative Defenses; Defendant's Burden Of Proof: Defense Of Extreme Emotional Disturbance; Due Process; Patteron V. New York, Lee Ann Johnson

Akron Law Review

The United States Supreme Court in Patterson v. New York upheld the constitutionality of a New York murder statute which places on the defendant the burden of proving extreme emotional disturbance. The Court thereby determined that New York courts in applying the statute against defendant Gordon Patterson had not violated his right to due process of law

The Constitutional Right Of The Indigent Facing Involuntary Civil Commitment To An Independent Psychiatric Examination, Scott F. Uhler

Akron Law Review

The recently established constitutional right to an independent psychiatric examination for a criminal defendant, when the defendant's sanity is at issue,' has not been extended to the involuntary civil commitment process However, for the following reasons, the right should be so extended.

First, the interpretation of due process in the involuntary commitment procedure, as construed by lower federal courts and state courts to require an exam, shows greater uniformity and logical cohesiveness than that defined by applicable Supreme Court decisions. Second, the area of juvenile adjudication presents great similarity of purpose to civil commitment, yet the due process protections deemed …

Ohio's Administrative License Suspension: A Double Jeopardy And Due Process Analysis, Max Kravitz

Akron Law Review

This Article examines whether Ohio's imposition of an administrative license suspension "ALS" immediately upon arrest for operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol "OMVI" bars a subsequent prosecution for the substantive offense.' Traditionally, administrative license suspensions have been considered civil, administrative and primarily remedial. However, increasingly punitive amendments to Ohio's ALS statutory scheme raise the substantial question of whether an ALS is truly remedial, or whether the imposition of an ALS constitutes punishment triggering double jeopardy and due process protection.

Bray V. Russell: The Constitutionality Of The "Bad Time" Statute, Erin Kae Cardinal

Akron Law Review

This Note analyzes the Court’s decision in Bray. Part II presents an overview of sentencing systems in the United States, the bad time penalty, and a brief background of the doctrine of separation of powers. Part III presents the facts, procedural history, and holding of Bray. Part IV analyzes the Court’s holding pursuant to the Due Process Clause rather than the doctrine of separation of powers. This Note concludes that although the bad time statute is unconstitutional as a violation of the doctrine of separation of powers, the court could have alternatively decided that the bad time statute also violates …

Charles Demore V. Hyung Joon Kim: Antoher Step Away From Full Due Process Protections, Brian Smith

Akron Law Review

Part II of this note traces the development of substantive due process protections for aliens, including general due process jurisprudence, the statutory authority for detaining criminal aliens, significant Supreme Court decisions, and approaches taken by the circuit courts. Part III examines the Supreme Court’s decision in Hyung Joon Kim. Part IV evaluates the due process analysis used by the Court and addresses the implications of this decision. Part V of this note concludes that the Court’s strained departure from strict scrutiny and its failure to provide an adequate explanation of the departure will have implications for aliens, citizens, and future …

Dangerous Diagnoses, Risky Assumptions, And The Failed Experiment Of "Sexually Violent Predator" Commitment, Deirdre M. Smith

Faculty Publications

In its 1997 opinion, Kansas v. Hendricks, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a law that reflected a new model of civil commitment. The targets of this new commitment law were dubbed “Sexually Violent Predators” (SVPs), and the Court upheld indefinite detention of these individuals on the assumption that there is a psychiatrically distinct class of individuals who, unlike typical recidivists, have a mental condition that impairs their ability to refrain from violent sexual behavior. And, more specifically, the Court assumed that the justice system could reliably identify the true “predators,” those for whom this unusual and extraordinary deprivation of liberty …

Implicated But Not Charged: Improving Due Process For Unindicted Co-Conspirators, Raeed N. Tayeh

Akron Law Review

This Comment posits that the practice of publicly naming unindicted co-conspirators before trial violates due process and that unless preventative measures are adopted to halt this practice, such due process violations will continue. This conclusion is buttressed by the text that follows, which surveys the relevant case law on the rights of unindicted co-conspirators, highlights the types of harm that a sample of unindicted co-conspirators have suffered as a result of being publicly named, and proposes procedures and rules that, if adopted, would conform with due process and help prevent these harms.

In this Comment, I will expand on the …

The 100-Plus Year Old Case For A Minimalist Criminal Law (Sketch Of A General Theory Of Substantive Criminal Law), Mike C. Materni

Mike C Materni

Criminal law defines the system of government of which it is the political expression; thus having a normative theory of substantive criminal law is paramount. U.S. criminal law has developed in the absence of such overarching theory, and is now plagued by overcriminalization. This article advances a model of a minimalist criminal law grounded on strong normative principles that are presented and defended not from the perspective of metaphysics or moral philosophy; but rather, in a historical and comparative perspective, as a matter of political choice. Core among those principles is the idea that in a liberal democracy the criminal …

Decoupling 'Terrorist' From 'Immigrant': An Enhanced Role For The Federal Courts Post 9/11, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Attorney General John Ashcroft has utilized the broad immigration power ceded to him by Congress to ferret out terrorists among noncitizens detained for minor immigration violations. Such a strategy provides the government two options: deport those who are not terrorists, and then prosecute others who are. While certainly efficient, using immigration courts and their less formal due process protections afforded noncitizens should trigger greater oversight and vigilance by the federal courts for at least four reasons: First, while the legitimate goal of immigration law enforcement is deportation, Ashcroft's true objective in targeting …

People V. Cole: Is The Incarceration Of An "Actually Innocent" Person Constitutional?, Aileen R. Kavanagh

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Justice-As-Fairness As Judicial Guiding Principle: Remembering John Rawls And The Warren Court, Michael Anthony Lawrence

Michael Anthony Lawrence

This Article looks back to the United States Supreme Court’s jurisprudence during the years 1953-1969 when Earl Warren served as Chief Justice, a period marked by numerous landmark rulings in the areas of racial justice, criminal procedure, reproductive autonomy, First Amendment freedom of speech, association and religion, voting rights, and more. The Article further discusses the constitutional bases for the Warren Court’s decisions, principally the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection and due process clauses.

The Article explains that the Warren Court’s equity-based jurisprudence closely resembles, at its root, the “justice-as-fairness” approach promoted in John Rawls’s monumental 1971 work, A Theory of …

Predictive Due Process And The International Criminal Court, Samuel C. Birnbaum

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The International Criminal Court (ICC) operates under a regime of complementarity: a domestic state prosecution of a defendant charged before the ICC bars the Court from hearing the case unless the state is unable or unwilling to prosecute the accused. For years, scholars have debated the role of due process considerations in complementarity. Can a state that has failed to provide the accused with adequate due process protections nonetheless bar a parallel ICC prosecution? One popular view, first expressed by Professor Kevin Jon Heller, holds that due process considerations do not factor into complementarity and the ICC could be forced …

Notice(Ing) Ex-Offenders: A Case Study Of The Manifest Injustice Of Passively Violating A "Felon-In-Possession" Statute, S. David Mitchell

Faculty Publications

Changing a law and criminalizing formerly legal conduct without providing notice of the change and without providing a reasonable period of time for the offending individual to comply with the change not only violates due process but is also manifestly unjust, especially given the scope and breadth of the collateral consequences that attach upon a felony conviction, such as the loss of the right to vote, to serve on a jury, or to receive certain benefits. With the far-reaching impact of a felony conviction on all areas of an individual's life, the maxim that "ignorance of the law excuses no …

Unreasonable Doubt: Warren Hill, Aedpa, And The Unconstitutionality Of Georgia's Reasonable Doubt Standard, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

Georgia’s “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard for determining intellectual disability has led to an absurd—and arbitrary—result. A Georgia state court held that defendant Warren Hill was intellectually disabled, yet still sentenced Hill to death. Seven experts—and the court—deemed Hill disabled under a preponderance of the evidence standard. He remains on death row, however, because Georgia’s “preposterous burden of proof” requires that intellectual disability be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, a standard experts have said is nearly impossible to satisfy. It “effectively limits the constitutional right protected in Atkins,” and creates a conditional, not categorical, ban.