Law Commons^™

Crawford V. Washington: The End Of Victimless Prosecution?, Andrew King-Ries

Seattle University Law Review

The article explores the Crawford decision in the context of victimless prosecutions. Part II discusses current trends in victimless domestic violence prosecution and the power and control dynamics of domestic violence relationships, including how these dynamics relate to, and create the need for, victimless prosecutions. Part III discusses the Crawford decision. Part IV explores possible interpretations of Crawford within the context of victimless domestic violence prosecutions. Part V explains why courts should interpret Crawford in a way that allows prosecutors to continue to prosecute batterers without a participating victim.

Culture And Contempt: The Limitations Of Expressive Criminal Law, Ted Sampsell-Jones

Seattle University Law Review

This Article will attempt to highlight certain important features of the expressive function of criminal law that have been neglected. Bringing these elements into higher relief will add to our understanding of how expressive criminal law works and, in particular, how it can fail to work as intended. This article will look closely at one example of the operation of expressive criminal law. The example comes from the area of criminal drug policy, and will examine how expressive drug laws have functioned in the street subculture of urban minority communities. Part II, describes street ideology and the social meanings of …

Williamson V. Gregoire: How Much Is Enough? The Custody Requirement In The Context Of Sex Offender Registration And Notification Statutes, Tina D. Santos

Seattle University Law Review

This Note argues that the Ninth Circuit was wrong. The registration and notification provisions operate to constructively restrain the liberty of a convicted sex offender and, therefore, Mr. Williamson is "in custody" for purposes of habeas corpus relief. To support this proposition, this Note will first discuss the federal statute pertaining to habeas corpus and review the case law interpreting the jurisdictional requirement that the petitioner be "in custody"; second, review and discuss Washington State's sex offender registration and notification statutes; and finally, analyze the relevant statute and analogous case law in the context of Washington's sex offender laws in …

Double Jeopardy—Civil Forfeitures And Criminal Punishment: Who Determines What Punishments Fit The Crime, Barbara A. Mack

Seattle University Law Review

This Article will attempt to distill from this confusion a meaningful double jeopardy policy, applicable to parallel civil and criminal proceedings, that takes into account the history of double jeopardy, recent changes in statutory law, and the contemporary chaotic state of parallel civil and criminal proceedings. Under current law, double jeopardy protects against three abuses: (1) a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal, (2) a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction, and (3) multiple punishments for the same offense. This Article will show that the multiple punishments prong has little basis in law, other than reliance …

Preface: Double Jeopardy In Washington And Beyond, Justice Philip A. Talmadge

Seattle University Law Review

The prohibition against double jeopardy is of ancient lineage in western civilization. In a ringing and scholarly dissent that rewards reflection, Justice Hugo Black said:

Fear and abhorrence of governmental power to try people twice for the same conduct is one of the oldest ideas found in western civilization. Its roots run deep into Greek and Roman times. Even in the Dark Ages, when so many other principles of justice were lost, the idea that one trial and one punishment were enough remained alive through the canon law and the teachings of the early Christian writers. By the thirteenth century …

The Double Jeopardy Implications Of In Rem Forfeiture Of Crime-Related Property: The Gradual Realization Of A Constitutional Violation, Andrew L. Subin

Seattle University Law Review

Over the past decade, the government has escalated its "war on drugs." Although the "war" has not decreased drug use or limited the availability of drugs on the street, the government continues to sacrifice the constitutional rights of its citizens in an effort to escalate the hostility. Since the "zero tolerance" policy of the Reagan Administration, the government has relied heavily on the forfeiture of property related to drug crimes as a tool to deter and punish the illegal distribution of drugs. The federal forfeiture statute, 21 U.S.C. § 881, allows the government to seize any property used to facilitate …

Dismantling The Exclusionary Rule: United States V. Leon And The Courts Of Washington—Should Good Faith Excuse Bad Acts?, Catherine Cruikshank

Seattle University Law Review

This Note will review briefly the history of the exclusionary rule under fourth amendment jurisprudence, with special emphasis given to the purposes the rule has traditionally been thought to serve. The significance of the Leon decision then will be examined in light of the emergence in Washington of an interpretation of article I, section 7 that diverges from the Supreme Court's interpretations of the fourth amendment. This Note will conclude by discussing how article I, section 7 continues to embody the several purposes traditionally served by the exclusionary rule.

The Court-Ordered Predisposition Evaluation Under Washington's Juvenile Justice Act: A Violation Of The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination?—Wash. Rev. Code § 13.40, Judith H. Ramseyer

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment analyzes the significance of the principles animating the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination by first looking at the purposes of Washington’s Juvenile Justice Act; second, by examining the status of the privilege against self-incrimination during sentencing; and third, by applying the values protected by the privilege to the use of predisposition psychological evaluations in Washington juvenile courts.

Book Review: H. Fingarette & A. Fingarette Hasse, Mental Disabilities And Criminal Responsibilities, John Q. La Fond

Seattle University Law Review

Whether mental illness and related impairments in the human psyche should affect an individual's criminal responsibilityfor law-breaking behavior has always provoked intense andwide-ranging debate. This debate clearly reflects society's lack of consensus concerning the appropriateness and scope of considering mental impairment in assessing individual criminal responsiblility. Thus, it is not unexpected that recently proposals to abolish the insanity defense have been seriously suggested or that noted scholars have urged society to place the disposition of mentally ill offenders in the exclusive hands of experts. That this heated discussion continues unabated should come as no surprise, since legal doctrines which excuse …