Law Commons^™

The Incredible Shrinking Confrontation Clause, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

Sharp turns in the Supreme Court’s recent Confrontation Clause jurisprudence have left scholars reeling from conflicting emotions: exhilaration, despair, denial, and soon, perhaps, cynical acceptance. While most commentators celebrated the demise of the incoherent Ohio v. Roberts framework, their excitement largely faded as the Court’s decisions in Davis v. Washington and Bryant v. Michigan revealed nascent flaws in the evolving doctrine and sharply curtailed the newly revitalized confrontation right.

Recent scholarship strives to reanimate the jurisprudence by expanding the doctrinal definition of “testimonial” statements – the sole form of evidence that the Court now recognizes as implicating the Confrontation Clause. …

Applying Crawford's Confrontation Right In A Digital Age, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Editor's Observations: It's Alive! The Federal Booker-Fix Debate Sirs, Frank O. Bowman Iii

Faculty Publications

Seven years have passed since Justice Ginsburg do-si-doed from the merits majority to the remedial majority in Booker and transformed the Federal Sentencing Guidelines into an advisory system.' And despite the logical absurdity of the Scalian Sixth Amendment doctrine that produced this outcome,' and despite the expectation of folks like me that this marriage of fish and fowl could not long survive, it survives. What is more, a great many people whose opinion matters now claim to love it-or at least to like it well enough to want to keep it for the foreseeable future. Thus, the outburst of legislative …

Panel On Prosecutorial Immunity: Deconstructing Connick V. Thompson, Dane Ciolino, Gary Clements, Bennett L. Gershman, Adam M. Gershowitz, Kathleen Ridolfi, Samuel R. Wiseman, Stephen Singer

Faculty Publications

In November 2011, the Journal hosted a symposium on prosecutorial immunity at Loyola University New Orleans College of Law. The symposium included an in-depth analysis of Connick v. Thompson. As part of the symposium, the Journal organized a Panel, the transcript of which follows. This transcript consists of the speakers' remarks along with audience participation and questions. The Journal has attempted to preserve the character and substance of the discussion. While this is not a traditional article, the Journal felt that it would be fitting to include it in its spring volume.

Rethinking Voir Dire, Eric R. Carpenter

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Nothing Is Not Enough: Fix The Absurd Post-Booker Federal Sentencing System, Frank O. Bowman Iii

Faculty Publications

This article is an elaboration of testimony I gave in February 2012 at a U.S. Sentencing Commission hearing considering whether the advisory guidelines system created by the Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in United States v. Booker should be modified or replaced. I argue that it should.

Is Texas Tough On Crime But Soft On Criminal Procedure?, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

Although Texas is well known for imposing tough punishments on convicted defendants, it is surprisingly generous in affording criminal procedure protections. In a variety of areas, including search and seizure rules, confession requirements, the availability of bail, prosecutorial discovery obligations, and jury trial guarantees, Texas affords protections vastly in excess of what is required by the United States Constitution. Even more shocking, these criminal procedure guarantees come almost entirely from Texas statutes approved by the legislature, not activist rules imposed by judges. This Article explores Texas's reputation as a tough-on-crime state and the seeming inconsistency between Texas being tough on …