Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 13 of 13

Full-Text Articles in Law

Falling Through The Crack: How Courts Have Struggled To Apply The Crack Amendment To Nominal Career And Plea Bargain Defendants, Maxwell Arlie Halpern Kosman Jan 2011

Falling Through The Crack: How Courts Have Struggled To Apply The Crack Amendment To Nominal Career And Plea Bargain Defendants, Maxwell Arlie Halpern Kosman

Michigan Law Review

Under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a defendant is normally obligated to attend all of the proceedings against her. However Rule 43(b)(2) carves out an exception for organizational defendants, stating that they "need not be present" if represented by an attorney. But on its face, the language of 43(b)(2) is ambiguous: is it the defendant or the judge who has the discretion to decide whether the defendant appears? That is, may a judge compel the presence of an organizational defendant? This Note addresses the ambiguity in the context of the plea colloquy, considering the text of several of the …


When A Company Confesses, Christopher Jackson Jan 2010

When A Company Confesses, Christopher Jackson

Michigan Law Review

Under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a defendant is normally obligated to attend all of the proceedings against her. However Rule 43(b)(2) carves out an exception for organizational defendants, stating that they "need not be present" if represented by an attorney. But on its face, the language of 43(b)(2) is ambiguous: is it the defendant or the judge who has the discretion to decide whether the defendant appears? That is, may a judge compel the presence of an organizational defendant? This Note addresses the ambiguity in the context of the plea colloquy, considering the text of several of the …


18 U.S.C. § 3501 And The Admissibility Of Confessions Obtained During Unnecessary Prearraignment Delay, Matthew W. Frank Aug 1986

18 U.S.C. § 3501 And The Admissibility Of Confessions Obtained During Unnecessary Prearraignment Delay, Matthew W. Frank

Michigan Law Review

Part I thus argues that the admissibility of post-sixth-hour confessions is governed by Mallory, under which a voluntary confession is inadmissible if, but only if, it follows a period of unnecessary delay. Part II addresses a possible objection to this conclusion - namely, that, with limited exceptions, subsection 350l(c) renders all post-sixth hour confessions inadmissible without regard to the reasonableness of the prearraignment delay. This interpretation is derived by negative implication from the proviso in subsection 350l(c) and would require courts to suppress confessions even though there has been no unnecessary delay, and even though the confessions would be …


Interlocutory Appeal Of Preindictment Suppression Motions Under Rule 41 ( E ), Clifford A. Godiner Aug 1986

Interlocutory Appeal Of Preindictment Suppression Motions Under Rule 41 ( E ), Clifford A. Godiner

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that preindictment rulings denying 41(e) motions are not immediately appealable. Part I discusses decisions that mandate dismissal of such appeals for want of jurisdiction. Part II examines the policy rationales behind these precedents. Finally, Part III argues that an adequate remedy exists outside of rule 41(e), rendering immediate appellate review of rulings on 41(e) motions unnecessary.


I Cannot Tell A Lie: The Standard For New Trial In False Testimony Cases, Daniel Wolf Aug 1985

I Cannot Tell A Lie: The Standard For New Trial In False Testimony Cases, Daniel Wolf

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines the question of what standard should be used for granting a new trial when a defendant's conviction is alleged to have been based, at least in part, on false testimony. Part I demonstrates the failure of the existing standards to strike a satisfactory balance between defendants' rights and the efficient administration of the criminal justice system. Part II argues that motions for retrial based upon false testimony should be governed by a standard drawn not only from newly discovered evidence cases generally, but also from cases involving prosecutorial misconduct. Finally, Part III suggests that the proper test …


Wright: Federal Practice And Procedure, Criminal Procedure, J. Edward Lumbard, George W. Shadoan Jun 1969

Wright: Federal Practice And Procedure, Criminal Procedure, J. Edward Lumbard, George W. Shadoan

Michigan Law Review

Reviews of 3 Vols. By Charles Alan Wright


Federal Criminal Procedure-Transfer For Trial Under Rule 21(B), F. David Trickey Jun 1964

Federal Criminal Procedure-Transfer For Trial Under Rule 21(B), F. David Trickey

Michigan Law Review

Defendant, a Delaware corporation, was indicted in the Eastern District of Illinois for violations of the Sherman Act. Proceeding under Rule 21(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure defendant moved to transfer the trial to the District of Minnesota, where its principal business offices were located. The parties stipulated that the alleged offenses occurred in both Illinois and Minnesota and submitted affidavits, briefs, and oral argument on the transfer motion to petitioner, the district court judge. While evaluating numerous other factors relevant to the transfer motion, the district court gave some weight to the contention of government counsel that …


Evidence-Confessions-Admissiblity Of A Subsequent Confession Under The Mcnabb-Mallory Doctrine, Ira J. Jaffe S.Ed. May 1963

Evidence-Confessions-Admissiblity Of A Subsequent Confession Under The Mcnabb-Mallory Doctrine, Ira J. Jaffe S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Defendant was indicted for first degree murder and convicted of manslaughter in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia. Defendant had willingly directed the police to the victim's body and voluntarily signed a written confession during a period of thirty-four hours detention prior to arraignment. At the arraignment defendant was informed of his rights and indicated that he was aware of them; in addition, the preliminary hearing was postponed in order to provide him opportunity to obtain counsel. Twenty hours after his arraignment the defendant once again voluntarily confessed while giving a police officer instructions as to the …


Federal Procedure-Appellate Practice-"Excusable Neglect" In Failing To Perfect Criminal Appeal Provides No Ground For Collateral Review Of Conviction, H. C. Snyder Jr. Jun 1962

Federal Procedure-Appellate Practice-"Excusable Neglect" In Failing To Perfect Criminal Appeal Provides No Ground For Collateral Review Of Conviction, H. C. Snyder Jr.

Michigan Law Review

After the ten-day period for filing a notice of appeal from a federal criminal conviction had expired, defendant filed a motion under section 2255 of the Judicial Code to set aside his sentence under a conviction for armed robbery. The motion was based on the improper admission of a confession given during an allegedly unlawful detention. The district court denied the motion on the ground that the error asserted did not amount to a denial of a constitutional right and that only constitutional defects are subject to attack after the time for an appeal has expired. The District of Columbia …


Criminal Procedure - Search And Seizure - Federal Court Injunction Against State Officer To Suppress Illegally Obtained Evidence In State Court, S. Anthony Benton Dec 1961

Criminal Procedure - Search And Seizure - Federal Court Injunction Against State Officer To Suppress Illegally Obtained Evidence In State Court, S. Anthony Benton

Michigan Law Review

Federal customs enforcement officers suspected plaintiff of theft from a waterfront pier. In the course of their investigation they searched plaintiff's home without a search warrant and detained plaintiff for questioning without first bringing him before a federal commissioner. Both acts violated the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Defendant, a state officer, although not a participant in the search, was present during the illegal detention at the invitation of the federal officers. Plaintiff obtained an order in federal district court enjoining defendant from giving any testimony or producing any evidence in state criminal proceedings against him with respect to property …


Constitutional Law - Due Process And Right Of Confrontation- Jencks Act, Robert J. Margolin S.Ed. Apr 1960

Constitutional Law - Due Process And Right Of Confrontation- Jencks Act, Robert J. Margolin S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

The Jencks Act like the rule it purportedly reaffirmed, was designed to insure "justice." Although the stated purpose of the act was to preserve the rights of any defendant under due process of law, the question remains unresolved whether, in articulating the rule in terms of "justice," the Court in Jencks v. United States incorporated it into the requirements of due process. To be sure, the underlying intent of both the Court and Congress is unclear, but of far more concern than the intent is whether the Jencks Act, in fact, violates the constitutional mandates of the Fifth and Sixth …


Eliminating The Battle Of Experts In Criminal Insanity Cases, Henry Weihofen May 1950

Eliminating The Battle Of Experts In Criminal Insanity Cases, Henry Weihofen

Michigan Law Review

It is the purpose of this article to discuss certain procedural devices which have been adopted in some jurisdictions, designed to eliminate the ''battle of experts" which still disgraces criminal procedure in most of our states, and to replace it with a more impartial, more scientific, type of investigation.


Federal Courts--Rule 33 Of Rules Of Criminal Procedure--Power To Grant A New Trial After Affirmance, Irving Slifkin S.Ed. Mar 1948

Federal Courts--Rule 33 Of Rules Of Criminal Procedure--Power To Grant A New Trial After Affirmance, Irving Slifkin S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

One John Memolo was convicted of tax evasion in the District Court of the United States for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The defendant's motion for a new trial, on the ground of prejudicial conduct of the trial judge, was denied. He then appealed assigning as error all of the grounds stated in his motion and also the denial of the motion for a new trial. The circuit court of appeals affirmed the conviction. The sentence was executed and the defendant imprisoned in a federal penitentiary. Then the district judge reconsidered, and in the interest of justice directed that the …