Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Law (9)
- Criminal Procedure (5)
- Courts (3)
- Juvenile Law (3)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (3)
-
- Legislation (3)
- State and Local Government Law (3)
- Constitutional Law (2)
- Supreme Court of the United States (2)
- Arts and Humanities (1)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1)
- Comparative Methodologies and Theories (1)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (1)
- Criminology and Criminal Justice (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Judges (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and Race (1)
- Legal Studies (1)
- Religion (1)
- Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion (1)
- Social Welfare Law (1)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (1)
- Institution
Articles 1 - 16 of 16
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Case For Extending Pretrial Diversion To Include Possession Of Child Pornography, Sarah J. Long
The Case For Extending Pretrial Diversion To Include Possession Of Child Pornography, Sarah J. Long
University of Massachusetts Law Review
Pretrial diversion removes offenders with a low-risk of reoffending from the penal system and instead sends them to supervised treatment programs. The result is lower cost to the state and a second chance for those who successfully complete the program. Typically, violent crimes, such as murder and attempted murder, are exempt from pretrial diversion. Notably, sex related crimes are also ineligible in all jurisdictions. By excluding all sex-related crimes from pretrial diversion, possession of child pornography is adjudicated by the courts. As a result, young, first-time offenders who may be candidates for treatment are bundled with physical offenders, members of …
Supreme Court, Queens County, People V. Michaelides, Christin Harris
Supreme Court, Queens County, People V. Michaelides, Christin Harris
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Miller V. Alabama: Something Unconsitutional Now Was Equally Unconstitutional Then, W. Patrick Conlon
Miller V. Alabama: Something Unconsitutional Now Was Equally Unconstitutional Then, W. Patrick Conlon
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat
In June 2012, the United States Supreme Court found mandatory life-without-parole sentences against juvenile offenders unconstitutional in Miller v. Alabama. The Court determined that because children possess “immaturity, impetuosity, and [fail] to appreciate risks and consequences,” they are fundamentally different than adults. Although Miller invalidated every juvenile mandatory life-without-parole (JMLWOP) statute across the United States, there is no clear indication regarding whether Miller retroactively applies to juveniles sentenced to mandatory life-without-parole before the Court’s ruling. As a result, states are split on whether to apply Miller retroactively. Fifteen states have yet to decide whether Miller applies retroactively, while several other …
Good Conduct Time For Prisoners: Why (And How) Wisconsin Should Provide Credits Toward Early Release, Michael O'Hear
Good Conduct Time For Prisoners: Why (And How) Wisconsin Should Provide Credits Toward Early Release, Michael O'Hear
Marquette Law Review
Wisconsin is one of about twenty states not offering good conduct time (GCT) to prisoners. In most states, prisoners are able to earn GCT credits toward accelerated release through good behavior. Wisconsin itself had GCT for more than a century, but eliminated it as part of a set of reforms in the 1980s and 1990s that left the state with what may be the nation’s most inflexible system for the release of prisoners. Although some of these reforms helpfully brought greater certainty to punishment, they went too far in eliminating nearly all meaningful recognition and encouragement of good behavior and …
A Comprehensive Administrative Solution To The Armed Career Criminal Act Debacle , Avi M. Kupfer
A Comprehensive Administrative Solution To The Armed Career Criminal Act Debacle , Avi M. Kupfer
Michigan Law Review
For thirty years, the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”) has imposed a fifteen-year mandatory minimum sentence on those people convicted as felons in possession of a firearm or ammunition who have three prior convictions for a violent felony or serious drug offense. Debate about the law has existed mainly within a larger discussion on the normative value of mandatory minimums. Assuming that the ACCA endures, however, administering it will continue to be a challenge. The approach that courts use to determine whether past convictions qualify as ACCA predicate offenses creates ex ante uncertainty and the potential for intercourt disparities. Furthermore, …
Conditions Of Confinement At Sentencing: The Case Of Seriously Disordered Offenders, E. Lea Johnston
Conditions Of Confinement At Sentencing: The Case Of Seriously Disordered Offenders, E. Lea Johnston
Catholic University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Distinguishing Between Procedural And Substantive Rules For Purposes Of Retroactivity On Collateral Review, Ryan C. Grover
Distinguishing Between Procedural And Substantive Rules For Purposes Of Retroactivity On Collateral Review, Ryan C. Grover
South Carolina Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Punishment Should Fit The Crime—Not The Prior Convictions Of The Person That Committed The Crime: An Argument For Less Impact Being Accorded To Previous Convictions, Mirko Bagaric
San Diego Law Review
The seriousness of the offense is the main consideration that should determine the severity of criminal punishment. This cardinal sentencing principle is undermined by the reality that often the criminal history of the offender is the most decisive sentencing consideration. Recidivists are frequently sent to imprisonment for long periods for crimes, which, when committed by first-time offenders, are dealt with by a bond, probation, or a fine. This makes sentencing more about an individual’s profile than the harm caused by the offender and has contributed to a large increase in prison numbers. Intuitively, it feels right to punish repeat offenders …
Does Religion Have A Role In Criminal Sentencing?, Jack B. Weinstein
Does Religion Have A Role In Criminal Sentencing?, Jack B. Weinstein
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Sentencing The Why Of White Collar Crime, Todd Haugh
Sentencing The Why Of White Collar Crime, Todd Haugh
Fordham Law Review
“So why did Mr. Gupta do it?” That question was at the heart of Judge Jed Rakoff’s recent sentencing of Rajat Gupta, a former Wall Street titan and the most high-profile insider-trading defendant of the past thirty years. The answer, which the court actively sought by inquiring into Gupta’s psychological motivations, resulted in a two-year sentence, eight years less than the government requested. What was it that Judge Rakoff found in Gupta that warranted such a lenient sentence? While it was ultimately unclear to the court exactly what motivated Gupta to commit such a “terrible breach of trust,” it is …
How Long Is Too Long?: Conflicting State Responses To De Facto Life Without Parole Sentences After Graham V. Florida And Miller V. Alabama, Kelly Scavone
Fordham Law Review
A juvenile offender waits for sentencing while a court calculates his life expectancy and determines the point at which his sentence effectively becomes his entire life. This is the scenario posed by recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions that have struck down life without parole (LWOP) sentences for most juvenile offenders but have left open the possibility of lengthy term-of-years sentences. Consecutive term-of-years sentences may leave many juvenile offenders in prison for the majority of their lives despite the holdings in Miller v. Alabama and Graham v. Florida that juveniles are different and more capable of reform than most adult offenders. …
What Was He Thinking? Mens Rea’S Deterrent Effect On Machinegun Possession Under 18 U.S.C. § 924 (C), Stephanie Power
What Was He Thinking? Mens Rea’S Deterrent Effect On Machinegun Possession Under 18 U.S.C. § 924 (C), Stephanie Power
Catholic University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Making The Right Call For Confrontation At Felony Sentencing, Shaakirrah R. Sanders
Making The Right Call For Confrontation At Felony Sentencing, Shaakirrah R. Sanders
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Felony sentencing courts have discretion to increase punishment based on un-cross-examined testimonial statements about several categories of uncharged, dismissed, or otherwise unproven criminal conduct. Denying defendants an opportunity to cross-examine these categories of sentencing evidence undermines a core principle of natural law as adopted in the Sixth Amendment: those accused of felony crimes have the right to confront adversarial witnesses. This Article contributes to the scholarship surrounding confrontation rights at felony sentencing by cautioning against continued adherence to the most historic Supreme Court case on this issue, Williams v. New York. This Article does so for reasons beyond the unacknowledged …
Sentence Creep: Increasing Penalties In Michigan And The Need For Sentencing Reform, Anne Yantus
Sentence Creep: Increasing Penalties In Michigan And The Need For Sentencing Reform, Anne Yantus
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The governor and several legislators have requested review of Michigan’s sentencing practices with an eye toward sentence reform. Michigan leads the country in the average length of prison stay, and by internal comparisons the average minimum sentence has nearly doubled in the last decade. This Article explores cumulative increases to criminal penalties over the last several decades as reflected in amendments to the sentencing guidelines, increased maximum sentences, harsh mandatory minimum terms, increased authority for consecutive sentencing, wide sentencing discretion for habitual and repeat drug offenders, and tough parole practices and policies. The reality for legislators is that it is …
The Unreviewable Irredeemable Child: Why The District Of Columbia Needs Reverse Waiver, Jamie Stevens
The Unreviewable Irredeemable Child: Why The District Of Columbia Needs Reverse Waiver, Jamie Stevens
University of the District of Columbia Law Review
In 2005 the U.S. Department of Justice estimated that adult criminal courts prosecuted 23,000 cases involving defendants under the age of eighteen nationwide. 2 This means that those defendants faced conviction and sentencing in adult courts. Transfer of those under eighteen into adult criminal court has become the states' first line of defense in the fight against youth crime. However, recent Supreme Court decisions have cast doubt on the wisdom, and even the constitutionality of that approach. Roper v. Simmons held that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the death penalty for anyone under eighteen years of age. 3 Graham v. Florida …
From Arbitrariness To Coherency In Sentencing: Reducing The Rate Of Imprisonment And Crime While Saving Billions Of Taxpayer Dollars, Mirko Bagaric
From Arbitrariness To Coherency In Sentencing: Reducing The Rate Of Imprisonment And Crime While Saving Billions Of Taxpayer Dollars, Mirko Bagaric
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Dealing with criminals and preventing crime is a paramount public policy issue. Sentencing law and practice is the means through which we ultimately deal with criminal offenders. Despite its importance and wide-ranging reforms in recent decades, sentencing remains an intellectual and normative wasteland. This has resulted in serious human rights violations of both criminals and victims, incalculable public revenue wastage, and a failure to implement effective measures to reduce crime. This Article attempts to bridge the gulf that exists between knowledge and practice in sentencing and lays the groundwork for a fair and efficient sentencing system. The Article focuses on …