Law Commons^™

Facebook, Crime Prevention, And The Scope Of The Private Search Post-Carpenter, Connor M. Correll

Georgia Law Review

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects people “against unreasonable searches and seizures.” The private search doctrine provides a notable exception to the Fourth Amendment, providing that the government may reconstruct a search previously performed by a private party without first obtaining a warrant. The U.S. Supreme Court developed the private search doctrine prior to the advent of the internet; however, modern technology has changed the way that individuals live. What was once done entirely in private is now done alongside ever-present third parties, such as cell phones and virtual assistants.

Facebook and other social media sites complicate Fourth …

Pretrial Detention Of Indigents: A Standard Analysis Of Due Process And Equal Protection Claims, Robert William G. Wright

Georgia Law Review

Over the past several years, criminal justice activists
have sought to reform misdemeanor bail policies that
condition pretrial release on an arrestee’s ability to pay
a predetermined cash bond. Activists have challenged
such bail polices by filing lawsuits on behalf on indigent
persons who have been exposed to such policies. Often,
these lawsuits allege that bail policies violate both the
Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the
Fourteenth Amendment. While due process and equal
protection analyses are generally well-defined, U.S.
Supreme Court precedent does not offer a clear analysis
for courts to apply to due process and equal protection …

Confronting Memory Loss, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman

Georgia Law Review

The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment grants
“the accused” in “all criminal prosecutions” a right “to be
confronted with the witnesses against him.” A particular
problem occurs when there is a gap in time between the
testimony that is offered and the cross-examination of it, as
where—pursuant to a hearsay exception or exemption—
evidence of a current witness’s prior statement is offered and,
for some intervening reason, her current memory is impaired.
Does this fatally affect the opportunity to “confront” the
witness? The U.S. Supreme Court has, to date, left unclear the
extent to which a memory-impaired witness can …

Heating Up And Cooling Down: Modifying The Provocation Defense By Expanding Cooling Time, Ariel J. Pinsky

Georgia Law Review

This Note argues for expanding the provocation
defense for criminal defendants by broadening the
applicability and recognition of both cooling time and
rekindling. This expansion can be accomplished by
transforming cooling time and rekindling into subjective
standards that focus on the unique internal and external
qualities of the defendant. Doing so would not only be
consistent with the underlying purpose of the defense but
also appropriate considering our modern understanding
of the psychological effects of trauma and reactivity to
provoking stimuli. Accordingly, courts should practice
leniency with respect to cooling time and rekindling. The
best approach to provocation is one …

The Meaning Of A Misdemeanor In A Post-Ferguson World: Evaluating The Reliability Of Prior Conviction Evidence, John D. King

Georgia Law Review

Despite evidence that America’s low-level courts are
overburdened, unreliable, and structurally biased,
sentencing judges continue to uncritically consider a
defendant’s criminal history in fashioning an
appropriate punishment. Misdemeanor courts lack
many of the procedural safeguards that are thought to
ensure accuracy and reliability. As with other stages of
the criminal justice system, people of color and poor
people are disproportionately burdened with the
inaccuracies of the misdemeanor system.
This Article examines instances in which sentencing
courts have looked behind the mere fact of a prior
conviction and assessed whether that prior conviction
offered any meaningful insight for the subsequent
sentence. …

Faulty Forensics: Bolstering Judicial Gatekeeping In Georgia Courts, Miranda S. Bidinger

Georgia Law Review

Forensic evidence is widely used in criminal cases
across the country and is accorded great weight by
juries. But critics have begun to question its reliability.
Its use has contributed to numerous wrongful
convictions, and though some individuals have been
exonerated, many remain incarcerated for crimes they
did not commit.
This Note explores a variety of forensic science
disciplines and their associated problems, the recent
push for forensic reform, and the current standards
governing the admissibility of forensic evidence at the
federal level and in Georgia courts, highlighting the
lenient standard embodied in the Georgia Code and
elaborated upon in …

Mass Suppression: Aggregation And The Fourth Amendment, Nirej Sekhon

Georgia Law Review

The FourthAmendment's exclusionary rule requires that
criminal courts suppress evidence obtained as a result of
an unconstitutionalsearch or seizure. The Supreme Court
has repeatedly stated that suppression is purely
regulatory, not remedial. Its only purpose is to deter
future police misconduct, not to remedy past privacy or
liberty harms suffered by the defendant. Exclusion, in
other words, is for the benefit of community members who
might, sometime in the future, be subject to police
misconduct like that endured by the defendant.
Exclusion's regulatory purpose would be greatly aided if
criminal courts could identify when a suppression motion
involved Fourth Amendment …

Protecting Access To The Great Writ: Equitable Tolling, Attorney Negligence, And Aedpa, Mandi R. Moroz

Georgia Law Review

Since the creation of the Antiterrorism and Effective
Death Penalty Act, attorneys have struggled to understand
and properly apply the Act's statute of limitations. As a
result, many attorneys have mistakenly filed federal
habeas petitions outside the Act's statute of limitations-
effectively barring their clients from federal court forever.
Attorneys who mistakenly misfile habeas petitions are left
with only one option: to request that the court equitably
toll the statute of limitations. While courts will not toll the
statute of limitations for mere negligence, courts are
divided on exactly what circumstances must exist before

allowing equitable tolling. Some courts require …

An Aggravating Adolescence: An Analysis Of Juvenile Convictions As Statutory Aggravators In Capital Cases, Lesley A. O'Neill

Georgia Law Review

In death penalty cases there is a requirement that
certain statutory aggravators must be present in order to
reach a death verdict. One such statutory aggravator in
most states is the defendant having previously committed
a felony, which can include crimes committed as a
juvenile. While the Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that
sentencing a defendant to death for crimes they committed
as a juvenile is unconstitutional, many states' death
penalty statutes allow for the possibility that the sole
aggravator relied on for a verdict of death is a previous
juvenile conviction. This Note argues that based on the
Court's …

You've Got Legal Mail: Applying Constitutional Protections To Attorney-Inmate E-Mail Communications, Gregory R. Steele

Georgia Law Review

Several U.S. Attorney's offices have begun to read e-mails between defense attorneys and their inmate-clients sent through the Bureau of Prisons TRULINCS system. District courts have been split on how they address the issue. This Note argues that the practice of reading attorney-inmate e- mails violates the Sixth Amendment. It specifically argues that the legal mail doctrine should be applied to invalidate this practice. It then argues the Bureau of Prisons should promulgate new regulations for legal e-mail that ensure compliance with the constitutional requirements of the newly applied legal e-mail doctrine.

Miscarriage Of Justice: The Cognizability Of § 2255 Claims For Erroneous Career Offender Sentences, Matthew B. Rosenthal

Georgia Law Review

Career offender sentencing enhancements present difficult questions for courts. One of the most difficult of these questions is deciding what crimes warrant the application of these serious enhancements. Federal courts sentencing defendants often must decide, with little guidance, what offenses constitute a "crime of violent" or "violent felony." On a few occasions, the Supreme Court has stepped in and told lower courts that certain crimes do not fit within these categories, and that their interpretation of the career offender enhancement is incorrect. Often, the recognition of this misapplication of the enhancements occurs years after an individual defendant has been convicted, …

Modifying Unjust Sentences, E. Lea Johnston

Georgia Law Review

Judicial sentence modification offers a means to address the phenomenon of over-incarcerationas well as the harsh prison conditions that threaten unjust punishment. Indeed, some legislatures have framed states' early release provisions as fulfilling goals of proportionality and just punishment. This Article explores whether the tools available to judges at sentence modification hearings are adequate to respond to the unjust punishment experienced by prisoners. In examining this question, the Article focuses on one population particularly likely to experience disproportionate or inhumane punishment: inmates with serious mental disorders. A deep literature suggests that individuals with serious mental illnesses are especially likely to …

Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: The Constitutionality Of Georgia's Burden Of Proof In Executing The Mentally Retarded, Veronica M. O'Grady

Georgia Law Review

In 2002, the Supreme Court in Atkins v. Virginia announced that executing mentally retarded defendants violates the Constitution. Georgia's standard for determining whether a criminal defendant is mentally retarded-and therefore ineligible for the death penalty- is the highest in the nation, requiring defendants to prove mental retardation to a jury, during the guilt and innocence phase, beyond a reasonable doubt. As in the case of Warren Lee Hill, Jr., this high burden necessarily results in Georgia executing defendants who are almost certainly mentally retarded,arguably violating the Atkins directive. Though once the first state to create a ban on executing the …

Killers Shouldn't Inherit From Their Victims-Or Should They?, Carla Spivack

Georgia Law Review

This Article questions, for the first time, the equitable and policy basis of Slayer Rules, the rules that bar killers from inheriting from those they kill. It shows that killings that involve inheritance usually occur as a result of domestic abuse or severe mental illness, and argues that, because the legal and social service systems offer little help to those trapped in abusive relationships or those disabled by mental illness, it is not justifiable for those systems to deprive the killer of an inheritance when he or she takes the only means of escape available.

A Feather On One Side, A Brick On The Other: Tilting The Scale Against Males Accused Of Sexual Assault In Campus Disciplinary Proceedings, Barclay S. Hendrix

Georgia Law Review

On April 4, 2011, the Department of Education's Office
of Civil Rights issued a "Dear Colleague" letter regarding
Title JX's applicability to sexual violence on college
campuses. This letter was sent to every college or
university receiving federal funding and instructed
recipients on how to meet their legal obligations. Some of
the most important changes in the letter pertained to how
schools must conduct their grievance procedures in
adjudicatingsexual assault claims. First, the 2011 letter
requires that schools use a preponderance of the evidence
standard to determine the accused's guilty or innocence.

Second, the letter strongly discourages schools from
allowing …

The Degrading Character Rule In American Criminal Trials, Paul S. Milich

Georgia Law Review

The rule prohibiting evidence of the accused's bad
character is steadily degrading as courts and legislatures
expand existing exceptions and add new ones. In Georgia,

we saw the rule almost disappear as trial courts blithely
admitted a defendant's past crimes to prove his or her
"bent of mind" to commit the crime charged. This Article
examines why the character rule is losing ground.
The thesis is that a rule requiring as much careful
balancing as the character rule needs a clear, strong
justification to hold its own when faced with competing
claims to admit the evidence in the search for …

Taking A Toll On The Equities: Governing The Effect Of The Plra's Exhaustion Requirement On State Statutes Of Limitations, Keri E. Mccrary

Georgia Law Review

If prisoners are required by federal law to exhaust
institutional remedies before they may file suit in federal
court, should a prisoner with a legitimate claim suffer
dismissal by the federal court if the statute of limitations
lapses during the time the prisoner spends exhausting
administrative remedies? The Prisoner Litigation Reform
Act (PLRA) of 1996 offers no guidance. Federal courts
may choose to apply equitable tolling to a prisoner's claim
should this predicament arise, saving it from dismissal
based on tardiness, but nothing requires the court to do so.
The PLRA's enigmatic exhaustion requirement has
engendered much litigation, and the …

The Prisoners' Property Dilemma: The Proper Approach To Determine Prisoners' Protected Property Interests After Sandin And Castle Rock, Corbin R. Kennelly

Georgia Law Review

The Proper approach to determine when prisoners have
property interests protected by the Due Process Clause is
currently uncertain. The Supreme Court addressed
prisoners' liberty interests in Sandin v. Conner, but lower
courts have split over whether to apply the Sandin test to
prisoners' property interests. Further complicating
matters, the Supreme Court recently addressed property
interests generally in Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales.
There, the Court seemed to add additional hurdles to the
finding of protected property interests: A statute must
clearly indicate that it gives rise to an entitlement; the
entitlement must have an ascertainable monetary value;
and, …

The Political Economy Of Criminal Procedure Litigation, Anthony O'Rourke

Georgia Law Review

Criminal procedure has undergone several well-
documented shifts in its doctrinal foundations since the
Supreme Court first began to apply the Constitution's
criminal procedure protections to the states. This Article
examines the ways in which the political economy of
criminal litigation-specifically, the material conditions
that determine which litigants are able to raise criminal
procedure claims, and which of those litigants' cases are
appealed to the United States Supreme Court-has
influenced these shifts. It offers a theoretical framework
for understanding how the political economy of criminal
litigation shapes constitutional doctrine, according to
which increases in the number of indigent defense
organizations …

Seen But Not Heard: An Argument For Granting Evidentiary Hearings To Weigh The Credibility Of Recanted Testimony, Michael M. Hill

Georgia Law Review

The case of Troy Davis shows how difficult it is for a
convicted criminal defendant to obtain postconviction
review of witness recantations. Convicted of murder on
the testimony of nine eyewitnesses, Davis spent over a
decade petitioning for judicial review of the recantations of
seven of those witnesses before the U.S. Supreme Court
ordered an evidentiary hearing in 2009. Concurrently, the
DNA revolution continued to prove the innocence of an
increasing number of convicted inmates across the nation,
and the majority of those convictions had relied on
eyewitness testimony. If these scientific advances suggest
that eyewitness identification is not as …

Vesting Title In A Murderer: Where Is The Equity In The Georgia Supreme Court's Interpretation Of The Slayer Statute In Levenson?, Mark A. Silver

Georgia Law Review

The recent Georgia Supreme Court ruling in Levenson v.
Word exposes difficult interpretative and equitable
questions posed by Georgia's slayer statute. The case
began after Debra Post inherited her husband's estate but
was then arrested for his murder. She used her husband's
life insuranceproceeds and the real property she acquired
through the murder to pay two law firms to defend her in
the murder trial before pleading guilty.
The court-appointedadministratorof the estate sued the
law firms for conversion for not returning these illegally
and immorally acquired funds. Under the Georgia slayer
statute, a murderer forfeits the right to serve as …

Waiving Good-Bye To Inconsistency: Factual Basis Challenges To Guilty Pleas In Federal Courts, William T. Stone Jr

Georgia Law Review

Rule 11(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of CriminalProcedure
requires courts to determine that criminal defendants'
guilty pleas have a factual basis. Once a district court
accepts a guilty plea, appellate courts diverge in their
willingness to review challenges to the sufficiency of the
plea's factual basis. Some federal circuits hold that a
factual basis challenge is waived by the guilty plea. Other
jurisdictions will review a defendant's factual basis
challenge on appeal. Despite the lack of clarity on this
point, the Supreme Court has not yet provided guidance
and the federal circuit courts have not offered a great deal
of …