Law Commons^™

Ad Law Incarcerated, Giovanna Shay

Giovanna Shay

Prison and jail regulation is the administrative law of mass incarceration. Although the United States imprisons more people than any other nation, our corrections policies are a legal “no man’s land.” Scholars ignore them. Courts defer to them. States routinely exempt them from their administrative procedure act requirements. This Article focuses on the largely unexamined area of corrections regulation and makes the case for subjecting corrections policies to notice-and-comment rulemaking, or according them less deference. Corrections rules became increasingly important when the first wave of prison reform efforts produced bureaucratization of prison systems in the 1970s and early 1980s. Subsequently, …

The Hybrid’S Handmaiden: Media Coverage Of The Special Court For Sierra Leone, Jessica Feinstein

Jessica Feinstein

As the first international war crimes court since Nuremberg to be located in the country where the crimes occurred, the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) has had a unique opportunity to directly impact its primary audience – Sierra Leoneans. This article examines the interactions between the SCSL and the local, West African media (rather than the international media) – in particular, Sierra Leonean journalists. Based on interviews with Special Court officials, third-party observers, and West African journalists, this paper analyzes the approach the SCSL has adopted with regard to media relations and its subsequent effect on both local coverage …

Just The Facts: Solving The Corporate Privilege Waiver Dilemma, Don R. Berthiaume

Don R Berthiaume

How can corporations provide “just the facts” — which are, in fact, not privileged — without waiving the attorney client privilege and work product protection? This article argues for an addition to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure based upon Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which allows civil litigants to issue a subpoena to an organization and cause them to “designate one or more officers, directors, or managing agents, or designate other persons who consent to testify on its behalf … about information known or reasonably available to the organization.”[6] Why should we look to Fed. …

Child Laundering And The Hague Convention On Intercountry Adoption: The Future And Past Of Intercountry Adoption, David M. Smolin

David M. Smolin

The United States ratification of the 1993 Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption became effective April 1, 2008, amidst a context of declining numbers of intercountry adoptions and increasing media attention to corruption and child trafficking in the intercountry adoption system. There is a need to sort out the connections between these events, and chart a course for the future. This article includes an extensive discussion of the work of preparation of the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption. The article demonstrates that concerns with child trafficking in the intercountry adoption system were a central impetus to the creation of the Convention. …

Can Criminal Law Be Controlled?, Darryl K. Brown

Darryl K. Brown

This review of Douglas Husak's 2008 book, Overcriminalization: The Limits of the Criminal Law, summarizes and largely endorses Husak's normative argument about the indefensible expansiveness of much contemporary criminal liability. It then offers a skeptical (or pessimistic) argument about the possibilities for a normative theory such as Husak's to have much effect on criminal justice policy in light of the political barriers to reform.

What Does Intent Mean?, David Crump

David Crump

Intent sounds as though it has a clear meaning. But it does not. Sometimes it is defined strictly, so as to require purpose: a conscious desire on the part of the actor to bring about the result. Sometimes it is a lesser standard, requiring knowledge that the result is likely to happen. Sometimes intent is defined in a way that corresponds, really, to recklessness or negligence, requiring only an awareness of some possibility of a harmful result. Some courts have even said that objective blameworthiness is sufficient to constitute intent, implying that no mental state at all is required. Some …

Classification Of Participants In Suicide Attacks And The Implications Of This Classification For The Severity Of The Sentence: The Israeli Experience In The Military Courts In Judea And Samaria, Chagai D. Vinizky, Amit Preiss

Chagai D Vinizky

*** A revised version of this article is forthcoming in 30 Pace Law Review (Winter2010) *** The twenty-first century witnessed a considerable rise in the number of suicide attacks. The largest suicide attacks were carried out by Al-Qaeda in the United States on 11.9.2001 when that organization crashed four passenger planes (two into the Twin Towers and one into the Pentagon building) killing 2,973 civilians. Between the 11th September and the present time, suicide attacks have taken place throughout the world, including in Turkey, Great Britain, Egypt, India, Jordan, Spain and Iraq leading to thousands of deaths. A large proportion …

Qualitative And Quantitative Proportionality - A Specific Critique Of Retributivism, John D. Castiglione

John D. Castiglione

This Article presents a normative model of proportionality review under the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause. I divide proportionality into two organizing concepts: “qualitative proportionality,” which concerns the methods used to punish the individual and the conditions under which he serves his sentence, and “quantitative proportionality,” which concerns the temporal length of the sentence imposed. I argue that the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause is best understood to mandate review of the qualitative proportionality of the sentence, but not the quantitative proportionality of the punishment. The most significant feature of this model is an appreciation for the role of human …

The Presumption Of Innocence In The French And Anglo-American Legal Traditions, Francois Quintard-Morenas

Francois Quintard-Morenas

Despite evidence that the presumption of innocence was something more than an instrument of proof, common law scholars in the nineteenth century reduced the doctrine to an evidentiary rule without acknowledging the role of the principle as a shield against punishment before conviction in both the civil and common law traditions. The resulting narrow conception of the presumption of innocence has since pervaded the legal and public discourse in the United States, where suspects are increasingly treated as guilty before trial. Using the French Declaration of Rights of 1789 and the English Prison Act of 1877 as points of reference, …

Review Essay: Golden Rule Ethics And The Death Of The Criminal Law's Special Part, Stuart Green

Stuart Green

This brief review of Crime and Culpability: A Theory of Criminal Law, by Larry Alexander and Kimberly Kessler Ferzan, with Stephen Morse, focuses on the authors’ proposal that the Special Part of the criminal law, the part that identifies and defines specific offenses, be radically stripped down in a manner that is reminiscent of the Golden Rule of Ethics, which, they say, offers a “clear” and “concise” guide to living ethically. Rather than a long list of specific prohibited forms of conduct (“don’t murder,” “don’t rape,” “don’t commit theft,” and the like), they argue, the criminal law should rely on …

Second Thoughts On Damages For Wrongful Convictions, Lawrence Rosenthal

Lawrence Rosenthal

After the DNA-inspired wave of exonerations of recent years, there has been widespread support for expanding the damages remedies available to those who have been wrongfully accused or convicted. This article argues that the case for providing such compensation is deeply problematic under the justificatory theories usually advanced in support of either no-fault or fault-based liability. Although a regime of strict liability is sometimes thought justifiable to as a means of creating an economic incentive to scale back conduct thought highly likely to produce social losses, it is far from clear that the risk of error is so high in …

Pragmatism, Originalism, Race And The Case Against Terry V. Ohio, Lawrence Rosenthal

Lawrence Rosenthal

Perhaps no decision of the United States Supreme Court concerning the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on “unreasonable search and seizure” has come in for more criticism than Terry v. Ohio, in which the Supreme Court concluded that even absent probable cause to arrest, a brief detention and protective search of an individual comports with the Fourth Amendment “where a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to conclude that criminal activity may be afoot and that the person with whom he is dealing may be armed and presently dangerous . . .” Terry is frequently denounced as granting the …

Crime And Punishment: Teen Sexting In Context, Julia Halloran Mclaughlin

Julia Halloran McLaughlin

Do You Swear To Tell The Truth, The Whole Truth, And Nothing But The Truth Against Your Child?, Hillary B. Farber

Hillary B. Farber

Currently in the United States forty-five states and the federal system do not recognize an evidentiary parent-child privilege. The United States Supreme Court has never granted certiorari in a case involving recognition of a parent-child privilege. For many, it is a revelation to learn that the government can compel testimony about communications and observations between parents and their children. A rights-based argument in favor of a parent-child privilege has not been articulated before in legal scholarship. This paper singles out one specific context, the prosecution of juveniles, and argues that such a privilege is essential in order to ensure children …

The Neglected History Of Criminal Procedure, 1850-1940, Wesley M. Oliver

Wesley M Oliver

Originalism has focused the attention of courts and academics on Framing Era history to interpret constitutional limits on police conduct. Previously unexplored sources reveal, however, that Framing Era limits on officers were expressly abandoned as professional police forces were created in the mid-nineteenth century and charged with aggressively investigating and preventing crime. The modern scheme of judicially supervised police investigations was then implemented after corruption and scandals of the 1920s. The development of modern criminal procedure has a rich historical background, but it has almost nothing to do with the events of the Framing Era.

Balancing The Rights Of The Public With The Jurors' Right To Privacy During The Jury Selection Process, Stephen A. Gerst

Stephen A Gerst

It is rare for a trial judge hearing a criminal case to receive a motion to intervene filed by third parties not named in the proceedings. In the jury selection process of cases involving high profile defendants, however, the public - including the press - has a heightened interest in the proceedings. At the same time, the trial judge may have a heightened interest in the protection of juror privacy. This article discusses the issue of when and under what circumstances a trial court may close proceedings to the public during the jury selection process and seal the written responses …

To Testify Or Not To Testify: A Comparative Analysis Of Australian And American Approaches To A Parent-Child Testimonial Exemption, Hillary B. Farber

Hillary B. Farber

Among many legal systems there are certain relationships that are deemed to possess such societal worth that despite the evidentiary value a witness may possess, he is immune from being compelled to testify against the other party in the relationship. In the United States, courts have recognized an evidentiary privilege for spouses, lawyers and their clients, psychotherapists and their patients. Surprisingly, the United States has not adopted a federal common law or statutory parent-child privilege. Among the civil law countries in Europe and Asia, a majority of countries prohibit parents and children from testifying against one another. Australia is the …

Pro-Prosecution Judges: "Tough On Crime," Soft On Strategy, Ripe For Disqualification, Keith Swisher

Keith Swisher

In this Article, I take the most extensive look to date at pro-prosecution judges and ultimately advance the following, slightly scandalous claim: Particularly in our post-Caperton, political-realist world, “tough on crime” elective judges should recuse themselves from all criminal cases. The contextual parts to this claim are, in the main, a threefold description: (i) the "groundbreaking" Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal decision, its predecessors, and its progeny; (ii) the judicial ethics of disqualification; and (iii) empirical and anecdotal evidence of pro-prosecution (commonly called "tough on crime") campaigns and attendant electoral pressures. Building on this description and the work of empiricists, …

Stop Taking The Bait: The Dilution Of Miranda Does Not Make America Safer From Terrorism, Ryan T. Williams

Ryan T. Williams

On December 25, 2009, a Nigerian tried to blow up a plane over Detroit, Michigan. On May 1, 2010, an American tried to set off explosives in New York's Times Square. Neither man succeeded. After both arrests, lawmakers clamored for more flexibility to interrogate terror suspects and for the suspension (if not elimination) of their Miranda rights. The Supreme Court subsequently decided three cases that severely dilute Miranda protections and Fifth Amendment rights. An examination of these decisions reveals that they fail to make America safer from terrorism.

Worse still, the dilution of American citizens' rights sends a dangerous message …

The U.N. Security Council Ad Hoc Rwanda Tribunal: International Justice, Or Judicially-Constructed “Victor’S Impunity”?, C. Peter Erlinder

C. Peter Erlinder

ABSTRACT The U.N. Security Council Ad Hoc Rwanda Tribunal: International Justice, or Juridically-Constructed “Victor’s Impunity”? Prof. Peter Erlinder [1] ________________________ “…if the Japanese had won the war, those of us who planned the fire-bombing of Tokyo would have been the war criminals….” [2] Robert S. McNamara, U.S. Secretary of State “…and so it goes…” [3] Billy Pilgrim (alter ego of an American prisoner of war, held in the cellar of a Dresden abattoir, who survived firebombing by his own troops, author Kurt Vonnegut Jr.) Introduction Unlike the postWW- II Tribunals, the U.N. Security Council tribunals for the former Yugoslavia [10] …

Criminal Forfeiture Procedure In 2010: An Annual Survey Of Developments In The Case Law, Stefan D. Cassella

Stefan D Cassella

This article is the latest in a series of annual surveys of developments in the case law regarding federal criminal forfeiture procedure. It covers cases decided in 2009 and changes to Rule 32.2 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure that took effect in 2009.

What's Reasonable?: Self-Defense And Mistake In Criminal And Tort Law, Caroline Forell

Caroline A Forell

In this Article, Professor Forell examines the criminal and tort mistake-as-to-self-defense doctrines. She uses the State v. Peairs criminal and Hattori v. Peairs tort mistaken self-defense cases to illustrate why application of the reasonable person standard to the same set of facts in two areas of law can lead to different outcomes. She also uses these cases to highlight how fundamentally different the perception of what is reasonable can be in different cultures. She then questions whether both criminal and tort law should continue to treat a reasonably mistaken belief that deadly force is necessary as justifiable self-defense. Based on …

The Moral Politics Of Social Control: Political Culture And Ordinary Crime In Cuba, Deborah M. Weissman, Marsha R. Weissman

Deborah M. Weissman

The Cuban revolution has been described as “the longest running social experiment” in history, and one not well-received in the United States. The U.S. government responded to the revolution first with suspicion, and then hostility. Even while the current administration has acknowledged the failure of U.S. policy, few substantive changes have been announced and the narrative of Cuba in the United States continues to dwell almost exclusively on political repression and economic failure. The Cuban revolution, however, is a complex process, one that defies facile explanations. This article subscribes to the perspective offered by social scientists who urge “a more …

“Intelligence” Searches And Purpose: A Significant Mismatch Between Constitutional Criminal Procedure And The Law Of Intelligence-Gathering, Robert C. Power

Robert C. Power

No abstract provided.

Forfeiture Of The Right To Counsel: A Doctrine Unhinged From The Constitution, Stephen A. Gerst

Stephen A Gerst

The Sixth Amendment right to an attorney is so fundamental that the United States Supreme Court has carefully developed requirements to ensure that an indigent defendant does not go to trial in any criminal case where there is a possibility of a deprivation of freedom without an attorney unless there is an affirmative waiver of the right to counsel on the record. However, the Supreme Court has not addressed what the record must show for finding that a defendant has lost his right to counsel as a result of the defendant's own misconduct toward the court or the defendant's attorney. …