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

Law Commons™

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

Series

Criminal Law

1983

Georgetown University Law Center

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Criminal Procedure, Paul F. Rothstein Jan 1983

Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Criminal Procedure, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Numerous changes in the rules governing criminal trials in federal court have been in effect for four months. Some are major and some are minor, but they should be studied carefully by lawyers handling criminal cases. Amendments have been made to:

  • Rule 6, on disclosure of grand jury information,
  • Rule 11, on nolo contendere and guilty pleas, plus a new harmless error rule,
  • Rule 12, on Jencks-type disclosures,
  • Rule 12.2, on testimony on mental condition of the defendant and mental examinations,
  • Rule 23, permitting 11-member juries and
  • Rule 32, on correcting pre-sentence reports and withdrawal of pleas.

    Go to article

    Resolving The Dilemma Of The Exclusionary Rule: An Application Of Restitutive Principles Of Justice, Randy E. Barnett Jan 1983

    Resolving The Dilemma Of The Exclusionary Rule: An Application Of Restitutive Principles Of Justice, Randy E. Barnett

    Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

    Discussions of the merits of the exclusionary rule usually begin and end with a dilemma not unlike the classic "prisoner's dilemma." Suppression of illegally obtained, but reliable, evidence that leads to the release of a guilty defendant may constitute an injustice and a threat to the safety of innocent citizens. Admitting illegally obtained evidence, however, may encourage police officers to engage in illegal conduct to the detriment of countless numbers of citizens. The premise of the prisoner's dilemma is that the prisoner's choices have been limited by his captor to two, each of which is morally objectionable. The debate over …

    Go to article

    The Justice Of Restitution, Randy E. Barnett Jan 1983

    The Justice Of Restitution, Randy E. Barnett

    Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

    A restitutive theory of justice is a rights-based approach to criminal sanctions that views a crime as an offense by one individual against the rights of another calling for forced reparations by the criminal to the victim. This is a sharp departure from the two predominant sanctioning theories-retribution and crime prevention. Rights-based analysts have criticized this approach for failing to include mens rea, or criminal intent into the calculation of sanctions, thereby ignoring the traditional distinction between crime and tort. Such a distinction is problematic, however, since punishment for an evil mind cannot be made compatible with a coherent individual …

    Go to article