Law Commons^™

Can Prosecutors End Mass Incarceration?, Rachel E. Barkow

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution and End Mass Incarceration. by Emily Bazelon.

Too Vast To Succeed, Miriam H. Baer

Michigan Law Review

If sunlight is, in Justice Brandeis’s words, “the best of disinfectants,” then Brandon Garrett’s latest book, Too Big to Jail: How Prosecutors Compromise with Corporations might best be conceptualized as a heroic attempt to apply judicious amounts of Lysol to the murky world of federal corporate prosecutions. “How Prosecutors Compromise with Corporations” is the book’s neutral- sounding secondary title, but even casual readers will quickly realize that Garrett means that prosecutors compromise too much with corporations, in part because they fear the collateral consequences of a corporation’s criminal indictment. Through an innovation known as the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, or DPA, …

When Will Race No Longer Matter In Jury Selection?, Bidish Sarma

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

We are coming upon the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Supreme Court's opinion in Batson v. Kentucky, which made clear that our Constitution does not permit prosecutors to remove prospective jurors from the jury pool because of their race. The legal question in Batson-when, if ever, can governmental race discrimination in jury selection be tolerated?-was easy. The lingering factual question, however-when will prosecutors cease to discriminate on the basis of race?-has proven far more difficult to answer. The evidence that district attorneys still exclude minorities because of their race is so compelling that it is tempting to assume that race will …

International Exchange Of Information In Criminal Cases, Michael E. Tigar, Austin J. Doyle Jr.

Michigan Journal of International Law

This article describes some of the means by which police and prosecutors obtain information in international criminal matters. An exhaustive catalog is not presented; rather, examples of international cooperation and conflict are dwelled upon to illustrate the need for systematic development of international law principles governing the interpretation and application of treaties, and the enforcement in both the demanding and the rendering state of rules concerning information exchange. These rules and principles should honor expectations of privacy and confidentiality, make dear the obligations of foreign persons and entities, including financial institutions, and ensure mutual respect for the sovereign interests of …

Prosecutorial Vindictiveness In The Criminal Appellate Process: Due Process Protection After United States V. Goodwin, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note reformulates the doctrine of prosecutorial vindictiveness in light of the distinction drawn in Goodwin between pretrial and posttrial charging decisions. Part I recounts the development of the vindictiveness concept, and argues that in extending the doctrine beyond the factual settings which moved the Supreme Court to fashion its original prophylactic rule, the circuit courts have seriously eroded an essential due process safeguard. Part II critically examines the distinction between pretrial and posttrial charging decisions relied upon in Goodwin. Developing the logical corollary of the Goodwin holding, this Part argues that just as the pretrial situation does not …

Prosecutorial Peremptory Challenge Practices In Capital Cases: An Empirical Study And A Constitutional Analysis, Bruce J. Winick

Michigan Law Review

As presently construed, the Constitution does not prohibit the death penalty. The states and the federal government may punish the commission of certain crimes with death, so long as the extreme penalty is not imposed on a mandatory basis and so long as the procedures used in imposing a death sentence meet constitutional scrutiny.

A demonstration that the prosecutor used the peremptory challenge in the manner described in a single case probably would be insufficient to support a constitutional challenge in the federal courts and in the vast majority of state courts. In these courts a prosecutor's use of the …

Reforming The Federal Grand Jury And The State Preliminary Hearing To Prevent Conviction Without Adjudication, Peter Arenella

Michigan Law Review

It is this Article's thesis that the substitution of plea-bargaining for the criminal trial as our primary method for determining legal guilt requires a fundamental reassessment of our pretrial screening processes. In a system where the prosecutor's decision to file charges is usually followed by a negotiated guilty plea, we can no longer pretend that the pretrial process does not adjudicate the defendant's guilt. Accordingly, this Article argues that it no longer makes sense to rely primarily on the trial to safeguard essential accusatorial principles when pretrial screening devices like the preliminary hearing and the grand jury perform the only …

Joint Trials Of Defendants In Criminal Cases: An Analysis Of Efficiencies And Prejudices, Robert O. Dawson

Michigan Law Review

Legislatures and courts, in weighing the relative advantages of joint and separate trials, have unreasonably struck a balance in favor of joint trials. The strongest justification traditionally offered for joint trials is efficiency. This Article shows that courts have greatly exaggerated the supposed efficiencies of joint trials while grossly underestimating the impediments joint trials pose to fair and accurate determinations of individual guilt or innocence. The propriety of joint trials is more than a question of efficiencies. Joint trials usually, although not always, help the prosecutor to get convictions, and thereby modify the balance of advantage in criminal trials. Disputes …

The Prosecutor's Duty To Present Exculpatory Evidence To An Indicting Grand Jury, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note explores the implications of the stark procedural disparities between prosecution by information and prosecution by indictment in those states where both methods are used. It first examines the consequences to a defendant of a prosecutor's decision to seek an indictment rather than proceed by information, the reasons underlying the discretion given the prosecutor to choose between the two methods, and the potential for abuse of this discretionary power. It then considers several alternative approaches for minimizing this potential for abuse. After rejecting possible constitutional objections to the disparity between indictment and information procedures and application of the common-law …

The Investigating Magistrate (Juge D'Instruction) In European Criminal Procedure, Morris Ploscowe

Michigan Law Review

For nearly five centuries the distinctive figure in the preliminary stages of European criminal proceedings has been the investigating magistrate, known in France as the juge d'instruction. Although temporarily eclipsed by the revolutionary reforms in France in 1791, he was soon re-established. In other European countries the juge d'instruction continued to be the central figure in the preliminary procedure through all the reforms achieved by the liberal movements of the nineteenth century. The investigating magistrate has remained a purely Continental institution. In theory and in practice he embodies the essential difference between Continental and Anglo-American criminal procedure preliminary to trial.