Law Commons^™

Supreme Court Preview 2014-2015: Criminal, Jeffrey Bellin, Beth Brinkman, Jeffrey Fisher, Gregory Garre, Kannon Shanmugam

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

The Incredible Shrinking Confrontation Clause, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

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. …

Text Messages And The Hearsay Rule In The Aaron Hernandez Case, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

The Evidentiary Significance Of “Tweets,” Texts And Status Updates (Starring Justin Bieber), Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Policing The Admissibility Of Body Camera Evidence, Jeffrey Bellin, Shevarma Pemberton

Jeffrey Bellin

Body cameras are sweeping the nation and becoming, along with the badge and gun, standard issue for police officers. These cameras are intended to ensure accountability for abusive police officers. But, if history is any guide, the videos they produce will more commonly be used to prosecute civilians than to document abuse. Further, knowing that the footage will be available as evidence, police officers have an incentive to narrate body camera videos with descriptive oral statements that support a later prosecution. Captured on an official record that exclusively documents the police officer’s perspective, these statements—for example, “he just threw something …

Rule 609 And The Frustratingly Unkillable Five-Factor Mahone Framework, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Reconceptualizing The Fifth Amendment Prohibition Of Adverse Comment On Criminal Defendants' Trial Sentence, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

Griffin v. California holds that the Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination prohibits a prosecutor from arguing that a defendant’s failure to testify supports an inference of guilt. In the four decades since Griffin was decided, Griffin’s doctrinal underpinnings have been strongly criticized by prominent jurists and commentators, and even Griffin’s contemporary defenders struggle to place the constitutional prohibition of adverse comment on defendant silence within a coherent doctrinal framework.

In light of these largely unanswered criticisms, this Article posits that the current Fifth Amendment-based prohibition of adverse comment is untenable and must be recast in a more narrowly tailored …

More On The Impeachment Of Criminal Defendants, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Reassessing Prosecutorial Power Through The Lens Of Mass Incarceration, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

More On The Future Of Present Sense Impressions, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Menendez And America's Public Corruption Problem, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Justice For The 1 Percent: A Corrupt Governor Stays Free, Those Who Should Have Never Been Jailed Die There, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Improving The Reliability Of Criminal Trials Through Legal Rules That Encourage Defendants To Testify, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

Reflecting a traditional bias against defendants' trial testimony, the modern American criminal justice system, which now recognizes a constitutional right to testify at trial, unabashedly encourages defendants to waive that right and remain silent. As a result, a large percentage of criminal defendants decline to testify, forcing juries to decide the question of the defendant's guilt without ever hearing from the person most knowledgeable on the subject.

This Article contends that the inflated percentage of silent defendants in the American criminal trial system is a needless, self-inflected wound, neither required by the Constitution nor beneficial to the search for truth. …

It's Still Too Easy To Push Blacks, Minorities Off Of Juries, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

How The Supreme Court Can Change Politics As Usual, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Is Punishment Relevant After All? A Prescription For Informing Juries Of The Consequence Of Conviction, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

The American jury, once heralded as “the great corrective of law in its actual administration,” has suffered numerous setbacks in the modern era. As a result, jurors have largely become bystanders in a criminal justice system that relies on increasingly severe punishments to incarcerate tens of thousands of offenders each year. The overwhelming majority of cases are resolved short of trial and, even when trials occur, jurors are instructed to find only the facts necessary for legal guilt. Apart from this narrow task, jurors need not, in the eyes of the law, concern themselves with whether a conviction and subsequent …

Facebook, Twitter, And The Uncertain Future Of Present Sense Impressions, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

The intricate legal framework governing the admission of out-of-court statements in American trials is premised on increasingly outdated communication norms. Nowhere is this more apparent than with the hearsay exception for “present sense impressions.” Changing communication practices typified by interactions on social media websites like Facebook and Twitter herald the arrival of a previously uncontemplated—and uniquely unreliable—breed of present sense impressions. This Article contends that the indiscriminate admission of these electronic present sense impressions (e-PSIs) is both normatively undesirable and inconsistent with the traditional rationale for the present sense impression exception. It proposes a reform to the exception that would …

Criminalizing Politics, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Does The 'Mcconnell Principle' Make Sense?, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

First Amendment Under Fire: Policing Protests, Jeffrey Bellin, Racehl Harmon, Timothy Zick, Claire Gastañaga

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Finding Evidence On Facebook, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

How Merrick Garland Could Help Heal America, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Constitution-Free Zones: False, Jimmy Barrett, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Darryl K. Brown, Robert P. Burns, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar, Jessica L. West

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Brief For Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Robert P. Burns, Sherman J. Clark, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Crime-Severity Distinctions And The Fourth Amendment: Reassessing Reasonableness In A Changing World, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

A growing body of commentary calls for the Supreme Court to recalibrate its Fourth Amendment jurisprudence in response to technological and social changes that threaten the traditional balance between public safety and personal liberty. This Article joins the discussion, highlighting a largely overlooked consideration that should be included in any modernization of Fourth Amendment doctrine—crime severity.

The Supreme Court emphasizes that “reasonableness” is the “touchstone” of Fourth Amendment analysis. Yet, in evaluating contested searches and seizures, current Fourth Amendment doctrine ignores a key determinant of reasonableness, the crime under investigation. As a result, an invasive search of a suspected murderer …

Circumventing Congress: How The Federal Courts Opened The Door To Impeaching Criminal Defendants With Prior Convictions, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

This Article spotlights the flawed analytical framework at the heart of the federal courts’ approach to one of the most controversial trial practices in American criminal jurisprudence — the admission of prior convictions to impeach the credibility of defendants who testify. As the Article explains, the flawed approach is a byproduct of the courts’ reliance on a five-factor analytical framework to implement the governing legal standard enacted by Congress in Federal Rule of Evidence 609. Tracing the evolution of the fivefactor framework from its roots in pre-Rule 609 case law, the Article demonstrates that the courts’ reinterpretation of the framework …

Attorney Competence In An Age Of Plea Bargaining And Econometrics, Jeffrey Bellin

Jeffrey Bellin

This Essay explores the concept of attorney competence in a criminal justice system dominated by plea bargaining. It focuses, in particular, on the results of a widely-reported empirical study of Philadelphia murder cases that found “vast” differences in legal outcomes based on the type of defense attorney assigned to the case. The first part of the Essay explores the implications of these empirical findings, which appear to stem from a counter-intuitive form of professional competence, persistence in convincing one’s client to plead guilty. The findings are particularly intriguing in light of the Supreme Court’s recent expansion of ineffective assistance of …

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

Jeffrey Bellin

No abstract provided.

Bloomberg Law Brief: Evidence Doctrine, Michael Best, Jeffrey Bellin, Andrew Guthrie Ferguson

Jeffrey Bellin

A discussion of a Supreme Court case over whether a juror may testify about statements made by another juror during deliberations.