Courts Commons^™

In (Slightly Uncomfortable) Defense Of ‘Triage’ By Public Defenders, John B. Mitchell

Faculty Articles

This article argues that triaging is necessary for public defenders and is a response to the work of Professor Freedman. Because states lack money in areas of greater community concern, the defense of indigent criminals is neglected and substantial resources are not likely to be forthcoming. The author previously set out a solution of triaging, which can be conducted either haphazardly or according to some set of rational principles based on ethical theory. The author concurs with Professor Freedman to the extent that the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington effectively ensures that Sixth Amendment Constitutional guarantees will …

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

Faculty Law Review Articles

Domestic violence offenses are difficult to prosecute because the batterer's actions often make the victim unavailable to testify. Since the mid- 1990s, prosecutors have pursued "victimless" prosecutions' to combat the problem.2 Victimless prosecutions seek to introduce reliable evidence without the victim's in-court testimony, often to maintain the victim's safety or to avoid re-victimizing the victim.3 The victimless prosecution is based largely on the admission of hearsay statements that a victim makes to 911 operators, police officers, doctors, nurses, paramedics, and social workers.4 Victimless prosecution has been a highly successful tool in society's efforts to eradicate domestic violence and it is …

Grappling With The Meaning Of 'Testimonial', Richard D. Friedman

Articles

Crawford v. Washington, has adopted a testimonial approach to the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. Under this approach, a statement that is deemed to be testimonial in nature may not be introduced at trial against an accused unless he has had an opportunity to cross-examine the person who made the statement and that person is unavailable to testify at trial. If a statement is not deemed to be testimonial, then the Confrontation Clause poses little if any obstacle to its admission.2 A great deal therefore now rides on the meaning of the word "testimonial."

Judicial Selection And Democratic Theory: Demand, Supply, And Life Tenure, Judith Resnik

Cardozo Law Review

How ought a democracy select its judges? Critics in Canada, England, and Wales invoke the democratic values of accountability and transparency to call for a diminution in prime ministerial control over judicial appointments. In the United States, Article III of the Constitution's text directs that the President nominate - with the advice and consent of the Senate - life-tenured federal judges. Bitter conflicts about particular nominees have produced many proposals for changes of that system. And in those states that rely on various forms of judicial election, concerns focus on funding and campaigning. In short, both globally and locally, democracies …

Why Were Perry Mason's Clients Always Innocent? The Criminal Lawyer's Moral Dilemma - The Criminal Defendant Who Tells His Lawyer He Is Guilty, Randolph Braccialarghe

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Third Parallel Primrose Path: The Supreme Court's Repeated, Unexplained, And Still Growing Regulation Of State Courts' Criminal Appeals, Russell M. Coombs

ExpressO

Recently the United States Supreme Court has ruled, in a series of cases beginning with Ornelas v. United States, that decisions of certain mixed questions of federal constitutional law and fact, arising under various amendments, must be reviewed de novo on direct appeal. The Court has not specified that state courts are bound by these rulings, but has used conflicting language relevant to that issue. Faced with this ambiguity, the courts of a number of states have departed from their prior practices by following these rulings, at least some because they consider themselves bound to do so, and have extended …

'You'd Better Be Good': Congressional Threats Of Removal Against Federal Judges, Marc O. Degirolami

ExpressO

In the attached article, I argue that congressional threats of removal against federal judges are increasing in prevalence and forcefulness and that as a result the strained relationship between the judiciary and Congress – a topic of recent attention and debate – will continue to deteriorate in the coming years. I examine two bills, the Feeney Amendment to the PROTECT Act and House of Representatives Resolution 568 (in which Congress would disavow citation in judicial decisions to foreign law), to demonstrate this thesis.

I next ask what explains the phenomenon of congressional threats of removal, deploying first Thomas Hobbes’ state-of-nature …

The Dilution Effect: Federalization, Fair Cross-Sections, And The Concept Of Community, Laura G. Dooley

ExpressO

The question of the relevant community from which a fair cross-section of jurors should be drawn has received little theoretical attention. This article seeks to fill that gap by using communitarian and postmodern theory to give content to the idea of "community" in the fair cross-section context. This analysis is timely and has grave practical importance, given that the federal government is increasingly assuming the prosecution of crime previously dealt with at the state level. This "federalization" of criminal enforcement has the second-order effect of changing the "community" from which criminal juries will be drawn, particularly in urban areas surrounded …

Does Time Eclipse Crime? Stogner V. California And The Court's Determination Of The Ex Post Facto Limitations On Retroactive Justice, Ryan D. Frei

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pleas For Dna Testing: Why Lawmakers Should Amend State Post-Conviction Dna Testing Statutes To Apply To Prisoners Who Pled Guilty, Daina Borteck

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Perspectives On The Federal Sentencing Guidelines And The Goals Of Sentencing: Debunking The Myths, Michael E. O'Neill

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Remaining Silent: A Right With Consequences, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 649 (2004), Jeffrey D. Waltuck

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Face To Face With The Right Of Confrontation, Richard D. Friedman

Other Publications

This article is an edited excerpt from the amicus curiae brief filed in Crawford v. Washington, heard before the United States Supreme Court on November 10, 2003. Prof. Friedman wrote the brief for the Court.

Cultural Heritage And Identity, Lucille A. Roussin

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article explores the intersection of "cultural property" and "cultural heritage," arguing that while cultural property refers to specific, legally defined objects of historical or scientific significance, cultural heritage encompasses a broader, collective concept tied to identity, history, and public interest. The article highlights how these concepts increasingly overlap, particularly in cases involving restitution, indigenous rights, and the commodification of cultural artifacts. It emphasizes the need for harmonized national and international legal frameworks to address these issues effectively.

Virginia's Capital Jurors, Stephen P. Garvey, Paul Marcus

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Next to Texas, no state has executed more capital defendants than Virginia. Moreover, the likelihood of a death sentence actually being carried out is greater in Virginia than it is elsewhere, while the length of time between the imposition of a death sentence and its actual execution is shorter. Virginia has thus earned a reputation among members of the defense bar as being among the worst of the death penalty states. Yet insofar as these facts about Virginia's death penalty relate primarily to the behavior of state and federal appellate courts, they suggest that what makes Virginia's death penalty unique …

Lay Participation In Legal Decision Making: Introduction To Law & Policy Special Issue, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

United States scholarship on lay participation revolves around one predominant form of lay participation, the jury (Hans & Vidmar forthcoming 2004). However, in the legal systems of many countries, laypeople participate as decision makers in other ways. Laypersons serve as judges (Provine 1986), magistrates (Diamond 1993), and private prosecutors (Perez Gil 2003). Lay and law-trained judges may also decide cases together in mixed tribunals (Kutnjak Ivkovi6 2003; Machura 2003; Vidmar 2002). Although diverse in structure, these methods share with the jury a set of animating ideas about lay involvement in legal decision making.

Many of these ideas appear to be …

Public Rights, Private Rites: Reliving Richmond Newspapers For My Father, Laurence H. Tribe

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

I Couldn't Wait To Argue, Timothy Coates

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Twice Grilled, J. Thomas Sullivan

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Mandamus As A Weapon Of "Class Warfare" In Sixth Amendment Jurisprudence: A Case Comment On United States V. Santos, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 733 (2003), John F. Costello Jr.

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Accomplishing The Purposes Of Sentencing–The Role Of The Courts And The Commission, Aaron J. Rappaport

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Rationalizing The Commission: The Philosophical Premises Of The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, Aaron J. Rappaport

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Danger At The Edge Of Chaos: Predicting Violent Behavior In A Post-Daubert World, Erica Beecher-Monas, Edgar Garcia-Ril

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Admissibility As Cause And Effect: Considering Affirmative Rights Under The Confrontation Clause, John G. Douglass

Law Faculty Publications

In this essay, I first examine some of the strategic choices spawned by the Supreme Court's "microscopic" focus on reliability in confrontation-hearsay cases. Rather than promoting the value at the core of the Confrontation Clause-the adversarial testing of prosecution evidence-the Court's approach leads to choices that ignore that value. While the Court scrutinizes hearsay under the microscope of reliability, it leaves the parties free to ignore and even to avoid available opportunities for effective confrontation of the hearsay declarant. At the same time, the Court's constitutional definition of reliability-which it equates with "firmly rooted" hearsay exceptions -has encouraged prosecutors to …

Wrongful Convictions And The Accuracy Of The Criminal Justice System, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

No abstract provided.

Crawford V. Washington, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

On June 9, by granting certiorari in Crawford v. Washington, 02-9410, the Supreme Court signaled its intention to enter once again into the realm of the Confrontation Clause, in which it has found itself deeply perplexed. This time there was a difference, however, because the grant indicated that the Court might be willing to rethink its jurisprudence in this area. Crawford, like Lee v. Illinois, 476 U.S. 530 (1986), and Lilly v. Virginia, 527 U.S. 116 (1999), presents a classic case of what might be called station-house testimony. Michael Crawford was accused of stabbing another man. His wife, Sylvia, was …

How Much Do We Really Know About Race And Juries? A Review Of Social Science Theory And Research, Samuel R. Sommers, Phoebe C. Ellsworth

Articles

The past decade has witnessed numerous high-profile criminal trials in which controversial verdicts have been attributed to racethe race of the defendant, the racial composition of a jury, an attorney "playing the race card," and so on. A predominantly Black jury's acquittal of O.J. Simpson and White jurors' leniency in the police brutality cases of Rodney King and Amadou Diallo not only sparked public debate, but also led to rioting and violence. In the wake of trials such as these, many have questioned the viability of the American jury system.' More specific questions regarding the influence of race on jury …

Confrontation As A Hot Topic: The Virtues Of Going Back To Square One, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

I have been working so obsessively on the accused's right to confront the witnesses against him 1 that I am gratified that the organizers of this conference have designated confrontation as one of the "hot topics" of Evidence law. I am not so egotistical as to think that my work has made confrontation into a hot topic; I am just glad to know that I am working where a good deal of action is, and that other scholars recognize that confrontation is an important area in which dramatic changes may be occurring.

In Defense Of The Search And Seizure Exclusionary Rule (Law And Truth - The Twenty-First Annual National Student Federalist Society Symposium On Law And Public Policy - 2002), Yale Kamisar

Articles

think Dean Pye's advice about casebook writing was sound,6 and what he had to say also applies to discussions and debates about such issues as the search and seizure exclusionary rule. We cannot (at least we should not) begin with Mapp v. Ohio. We need a prelude.

Virtual Cross-Examination: The Art Of Impeaching Hearsay, John G. Douglass

Law Faculty Publications

Trial lawyers and judges are quite accustomed to courtroom battles over the admissibility of hearsay. But relatively few have much experience at challenging the credibility of hearsay. Once hearsay is admitted in evidence, even the ablest advocates typically proceed as if the hearsay battle were over, at least until the appeal. Few lawyers take advantage of the opportunities available to impeach the hearsay declarant. Consider the perspective of one experienced trial judge: I sometimes wonder at what seems to me the passing up of golden opportunities by the able advocate. Foremost among these lost opportunities is the virtual total neglect …