Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Courts (2)
- Criminal Law (2)
- Double Jeopardy Clause (2)
- Federal Sentencing Guidelines (2)
- Federal courts (2)
-
- Real offense (2)
- Real offense sentencing (2)
- Sentencing guidelines (2)
- Sentencing procedure (2)
- Aggravating United States v. McCormick (1)
- Aggravating sentencing factors (1)
- Choice of forum (1)
- Compulsory joinder (1)
- Due Process Clause (1)
- Federal Sentencing Commission (1)
- Federal sentencing (1)
- Federal sentencing guidelines (1)
- Foreign plaintiffs (1)
- Forum non conveniens (1)
- Forum non conveniens doctrine (1)
- Grady v. Corbin (1)
- Inherent power (1)
- Prior conviction enhancements (1)
- Prosecutorial discretion (1)
- Real-offense model (1)
- Relevant conduct enhancements (1)
- Subsequent prosecution (1)
- The Rules Enabling Act (1)
- The Rules of Decision Act (1)
- The transaction rule (1)
- File Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Contemplating The Successive Prosecution Phenomenon In The Federal System, Elizabeth T. Lear
Contemplating The Successive Prosecution Phenomenon In The Federal System, Elizabeth T. Lear
Elizabeth T Lear
Constitutional scholars have long debated the relative merits of a conduct-based compulsory joinder rule. The dialogue has centered on the meaning of the “same offence” language of the Double Jeopardy Clause, concentrating specifically on whether it includes the factual circumstances giving rise to criminal liability or applies only to the statutory offenses charged. However, the Supreme Court, in United States v. Dixon, abandoned as “unworkable” a limited conduct-based approach it had fashioned just three years before in Grady v. Corbin.
This Article does not assess the frequency with which federal authorities prosecute joinable offenses separately. While such information ultimately is …
National Interests, Foreign Injuries, And Federal Forum Non Conveniens, Elizabeth Lear
National Interests, Foreign Injuries, And Federal Forum Non Conveniens, Elizabeth Lear
Elizabeth T Lear
This Article argues that the federal forum non conveniens doctrine subverts critical national interests in international torts cases. For over a quarter century, federal judges have assumed that foreign injury cases, particularly those filed by foreign plaintiffs, are best litigated abroad. This assumption is incorrect. Foreign injuries caused by multinational corporations who tap the American market implicate significant national interests in compensation and/or deterrence. Federal judges approach the forum non conveniens decision as if it were a species of choice of law, as opposed to a choice of forum question. Analyzing the cases from an adjudicatory perspective reveals that in …
Congress, The Federal Courts, And Forum Non Conveniens: Friction On The Frontier Of The Inherent Power, Elizabeth T. Lear
Congress, The Federal Courts, And Forum Non Conveniens: Friction On The Frontier Of The Inherent Power, Elizabeth T. Lear
Elizabeth T Lear
The federal forum non conveniens regime has many flaws; its most serious, however, is its lack of constitutional support. Founded upon the inherent authority of Article III, the forum non conveniens doctrine is an outlier, residing in the area over which Congress retains plenary control. The Court has long treated the forum non conveniens dismissal power as the norm against which Congress legislates. This Article argues that the time has come to reconsider this interpretive approach. In the case of peripheral inherent power rules like forum non conveniens, the prevailing presumption should be reversed. The Court, rather than Congress, should …
Double Jeopardy, The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, And The Subsequent-Prosecution Dilemma, Elizabeth T. Lear
Double Jeopardy, The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, And The Subsequent-Prosecution Dilemma, Elizabeth T. Lear
Elizabeth T Lear
The choice to embrace a real-offense regime probably constitutes the single most controversial decision made by the Federal Sentencing Commission in drafting the Federal Sentencing Guidelines ("Guidelines"). Real-offense sentencing bases punishment on a defendant's actual conduct as opposed to the offense of conviction. The Guidelines sweep a variety of factors into the sentencing inquiry, including criminal offenses for which no conviction has been obtained. Under the Guidelines, therefore, prosecutorial charging decisions and even verdicts of acquittal after jury trial may have little impact at sentencing.
Long before the adoption of the Guidelines, courts bent on rationalizing the real-offense regime devised …
Is Conviction Irrelevant?, Elizabeth T. Lear
Is Conviction Irrelevant?, Elizabeth T. Lear
Elizabeth T Lear
Since 1986, the country has been witness to a revolution in federal sentencing practice: indeterminate sentencing, dominated by discretion and focused on the rehabilitative prospects of the offender, has been replaced by guidelines infused with offense-based considerations. As sweeping as the change in sentencing procedure has been, the system retains troubling aspects of the former regime. The most controversial among these is the Guidelines' reliance on unadjudicated conduct to determine proper punishment levels. This approach is a variation on “real offense” sentencing, which severs the punishment inquiry from the offense of conviction, focusing instead on an offender's "actual" conduct. Under …