Criminal Law Commons^™

Leavitt V. State, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 83 (Dec. 29, 2016) (Per Curiam), Brent Resh

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court expressly repudiated the Ninth Circuit’s interpretation of Nevada law in Riley v. McDaniel and therefore found that Riley cannot serve as the basis for an argument that good cause exists to overcome a procedural default in filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

The Use Of Risk Assessment At Sentencing: Implications For Research And Policy, Steven L. Chanenson, Jordan M. Hyatt

Working Paper Series

At-sentencing risk assessments are predictions of an individual’s statistically likely future criminal conduct. These assessments can be derived from a number of methodologies ranging from unstructured clinical judgment to advanced statistical and actuarial processes. Some assessments consider only correlates of criminal recidivism, while others also take into account criminogenic needs. Assessments of this nature have long been used to classify defendants for treatment and supervision within prisons and on community supervision, but they have only relatively recently begun to be used – or considered for use – during the sentencing process. This shift in application has raised substantial practical and …

Conviction By Prior Impeachment, Anna Roberts

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Mayo V. Eigh. Jud, Dist. Ct., 123 Nev. Adv. Op. 79 (Nov. 23, 2016), Alex Velto

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court found that the district court did not err when it found no violation of NRS 172.145(2). The Court interpreted NRS 172.145(2), which creates a duty on district attorneys to submit evidence to a grand jury if they are “aware” it will “explain away the charge.” The Court determined that a district attorney must be “aware” evidence has exculpatory value before there is a duty to present the evidence to a grand jury. The district attorney is not obligated to present exculpatory evidence it possesses but does not recognize as exculpatory. In the case at issue, because the district …

Newsroom: Margulies Cited On Military Commissions 11-04-2016, Peter S. Margulies

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Appellant, John Hill V. State Of Maryland, No. 2740, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Silva Georgian

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

When Empathy Bites Back: Cautionary Tales From Neuroscience For Capital Sentencing, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Amelia Courtney Hritz, Caisa Elizabeth Royer, John H. Blume

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The neuroscience of empathy provides one more reason to believe that the decision to sentence another human being to death is inevitably an arbitrary one, and one that cannot be divorced from either race or caprice. While we can tinker with aspects of capital trials that exacerbate caprice and discrimination stemming from empathy, we cannot alter basic neural responses to the pain of others and therefore cannot rationalize (in either sense of the word) empathic responses.

Sindelar V. State, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 68 (Sept. 29, 2016), Skyler Sullivan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In Nevada, if a person is convicted three times within seven years for driving under the influence (DUI), the third conviction is a category B felony.2 The Court held that a felony DUI conviction in Utah, which occurs upon a person’s third DUI conviction within ten years, can be included as a past conviction in a later DUI offense in Nevada to make the offense a category B felony under NRS 484.410 because the conduct required to violate the Utah law is “the same or similar” as that required to violate the Nevada law.

Trending @ Rwu Law: Professor Niki Kuckes's Post: Video Highlights Litigation Academy: September 20, 2016, Niki Kuckes

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

New Approaches To Data-Driven Civilian Oversight Of Law Enforcement: An Introduction To The Second Nacole/Cjpr Special Issue, Daniel L. Stageman, Nicole M. Napolitano, Brian Buchner

Publications and Research

In April of 2016, National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) and John Jay College partnered to sponsor the Academic Symposium “Building Public Trust: Generating Evidence to Enhance Police Accountability and Legitimacy.” This essay introduces the Criminal Justice Policy Review Special Issue featuring peer-reviewed, empirical research papers first presented at the Symposium. We provide context for the Symposium in relation to contemporary national discourse on police accountability and legitimacy. In addition, we review each of the papers presented at the Symposium, and provide in-depth reviews of each of the manuscripts included in the Special Issue.

Manning V. State, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 67 (September 15, 2016), Andrew Clark

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A request for a jury instruction on a lesser-included offense is sufficient if there is any evidence the defendant can be convicted of the lesser crime. Failure to give such an instruction is reversible error. Further, although NRS 175.161(6) allows district courts to settle jury instructions in chambers, district courts should solicit written copies of proposed jury instructions to ensure a clear record on appeal.

Justice Scalia’S Originalism And Formalism: The Rule Of Criminal Law As A Law Of Rules, Stephanos Bibas

All Faculty Scholarship

Far too many reporters and pundits collapse law into politics, assuming that the left–right divide between Democratic and Republican appointees neatly explains politically liberal versus politically conservative outcomes at the Supreme Court. The late Justice Antonin Scalia defied such caricatures. His consistent judicial philosophy made him the leading exponent of originalism, textualism, and formalism in American law, and over the course of his three decades on the Court, he changed the terms of judicial debate. Now, as a result, supporters and critics alike start with the plain meaning of the statutory or constitutional text rather than loose appeals to legislative …

Newsroom: Kuckes On Grand Jury Secrecy 8/30/2016, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Mcnamara V. State, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 60 (August 12, 2016), Annie Avery

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) the state of Nevada has territorial jurisdiction under NRS 171.020 when a defendant has criminal intent and he or she performs any act in this state in furtherance of that criminal intent; (2) territorial jurisdiction is a question of law for the court, not a question of fact for the jury; (3) the State bears the burden of proving territorial jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence; and (4) omitting a lesser offense on a jury form is not a reversible error where the jury is properly instructed on the lesser offense.

Martinez-Hernandez V. The State Of Nevada, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 61 (Aug. 12, 2016), Angela Lee

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court determined that (1) if collateral consequences of a criminal conviction exist, a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the validity of a judgment of conviction, filed while imprisoned, is not moot once the petitioner is released, and (2) a criminal conviction creates a presumption that collateral consequences exist.

Beyond Body Cameras: Defending A Robust Right To Record The Police, Jocelyn Simonson

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

How Being Right Can Risk Wrongs, Paul H. Robinson, Sarah M. Robinson

All Faculty Scholarship

This is a chapter from the new book The Vigilante Echo. Previous chapters have made clear that some vigilantism can be morally justified where the government has failed in its promise under the social contract to protect and to do justice. But this chapter explains how even moral vigilante action can be problematic for the larger society. Vigilantes may try to do the right thing but are likely to lack the training and professional neutrality of police. They may be successful, but only on pushing the crime problem to an adjacent neighborhood. Because their open lawbreaking may seem admirable …

Shadow Vigilante Officials Manipulate And Distort To Force Justice From An Apparently Reluctant System, Paul H. Robinson, Sarah M. Robinson

All Faculty Scholarship

The real danger of the vigilante impulse is not of hordes of citizens, frustrated by the system’s doctrines of disillusionment, rising up to take the law into their own hands. Frustration can spark a vigilante impulse but such classic aggressive vigilantism is not the typical response. More common is the expression of disillusionment in less brazen ways, by a more surreptitious undermining and distortion of the operation of the criminal justice system.

Shadow vigilantes, as they might be called, can affect the operation of the system in a host of important ways. For example, when people act as classic vigilantes …

Steve Dell Mcneill V. The State Of Nevada, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 54 (July 28, 2016), Adrian Viesca

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Supreme Court determined that the plain language of NRS 213.1243 does not grant the State Board of Parole Commissioners authority to impose additional conditions not enumerated in the statute when supervising sex offenders on lifetime supervision.

Blankenship V. State, 132 Nev. Ad. Op 50 (Jul. 21, 2016), Heather Armantrout

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered whether scoring errors in criminal defendants’ Probation Success Probability (PSP) forms constituted “impalpable or highly suspect evidence,” thereby adversely influencing the Division of Parole and Probation’s (the Division) sentencing recommendations. The Court affirmed one criminal defendant’s judgment of conviction (Docket No. 66118), but it vacated his sentence and remanded for a new sentencing hearing. It held that the district court abused its discretion and that defendant’s sentence was prejudiced because the district court relied on an erroneous PSP form in reaching its sentencing decision. It affirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence of another criminal defendant (Docket …

Newsroom: Justin Bonus '11 In The New Yorker 7/8/2016, Jennifer Gonnerman, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Implementing Change In Sentencing And Corrections: The Need For Broad-Based Research, Nora V. Demleitner

Scholarly Articles

None available

Identifying Criminals’ Risk Preferences, Murat C. Mungan, Jonathan Klick

Faculty Scholarship

There is a 250-year-old presumption in the criminology and law enforcement literature that people are deterred more by increases in the certainty rather than increases in the severity of legal sanctions. We call this presumption the Certainty Aversion Presumption (CAP). Simple criminal decision-making models suggest that criminals must be risk seeking if they behave consistently with CAP. This implication leads to disturbing interpretations, such as criminals being categorically different from law-abiding people, who often display risk-averse behavior while making financial decisions. Moreover, policy discussions that incorrectly rely on criminals’ risk attitudes implied by CAP are ill informed, and may therefore …

The Jurisdiction Of The Irish Courts In The Protection Of The Constitutional Rights Of A Person Accused Of A Crime., Adrian Berski

Reports

Studying the Irish Constitutional Law, requires the understanding of how the Irish Political System was evolved. Montesquieu's tripartite system, adopted by the Republic of Ireland is the judiciary[1] has a particular place in the Irish Constitution in articles 34 - 37[2].

The main purpose of this essay is to analyse the balance between the jurisdiction of the Irish Courts in the protection of the constitutional rights of a person accused of a crime and the functioning of the criminal justice system in protecting Society`s general interest. The first section presents a brief summary of the courts functions …

The Languishing Public Safety Doctrine, Brian Gallini

School of Law Faculty Publications and Presentations

Every semester, law students across the country read New York v. Quarles in criminal procedure. The Supreme Court’s 1984 decision in Quarles established the public safety exception—the first and only exception to the requirements of Miranda v. Arizona. But at the time of Quarles’s issuance, no one could have predicted just how long it would sit untouched by the Supreme Court. Application of Quarles to high profile defendants like James Holmes and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev illustrate the need for more clarity in the context of applying the public safety exception.Mores specifically, those cases demonstrate why the Supreme Court needs to re-examine …

Trending @ Rwu Law: Vanessa Rodriguez's Post: Clinics Collaborate On 'Crimmigration': 04/19/2016, Vanessa Rodriguez

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

State V. Carroll, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 23 (Apr. 7, 2016), Jessie Folkestad

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Defendant Deangelo Carroll appealed from a conviction for conspiracy to commit murder and first-degree murder with use of a deadly weapon. The Supreme Court of Nevada found the district court erred in denying Carroll’s motion to suppress his statements to police because the police subjected Carroll to a custodial interrogation, without advising him of his Miranda rights. The Court affirmed however, finding the error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Mass Incarceration: An Annotated Bibliography, Nicole P. Dyszlewski, Lucinda Harrison-Cox, Raquel Ortiz

Law Library Staff Publications

No abstract provided.

How To Change The Philosophy And Practice Of Probation And Supervised Release: Data Analytics, Cost Control, Focus On Reentry, And A Clear Mission, Nora V. Demleitner

Scholarly Articles

None available.

Reclaiming The Importance Of The Defendant's Testimony: Prior Conviction Impeachment And The Fight Against Implicit Stereotyping, Anna Roberts

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.