Criminal Law Commons^™

Amend The Communications Decency Act To Protect Victims Of Sexual Exploitation, Samantha Vardaman

Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence

No abstract provided.

The Freedom From Sexploitation Agenda: Policy And Legislative Recommendations To Curb Sexual Exploitation, Dawn Hawkins

Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence

No abstract provided.

Measuring The Creative Plea Bargin, Thea Johnson

Indiana Law Journal

A great deal of criminal law scholarship and practice turns on whether a defendant gets a good deal through plea bargaining. But what is a good deal? And how do defense attorneys secure such deals? Much scholarship measures plea bargains by one metric: how many years the defendant receives at sentencing. In the era of collateral consequences, however, this is no longer an adequate metric as it misses a world of bargaining that happens outside of the sentence. Through empirical re-search, this Article examines the measure of a good plea and the work that goes into negotiating such a plea. …

Three Strikes And You're Still In? Interpreting The Three-Strike Provision Of The Prison Litigation Reform Act In The Eleventh Circuit, Beatrice C. Hancock

Mercer Law Review

The three-strike provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA)' was implemented to curb the filing of frivolous and meritless claims by prisoner litigants in federal courts. Although the PLRA is over two decades old, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit had not had an opportunity to interpret the three-strike provision until May of 2016. Daker v. Commissioner, Georgia Department of Corrections tasked the court with determining what constitutes a strike under the PLRA and whether a serial litigant had accrued three strikes in the dismissals of his previous filings.3 The court determined that want of …

The Grand Jury's Role In The Prosecution Of Unjustified Police Killings - Challenges And Solutions, Roger Fairfax

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

One of the most profound tests of trust in a society is when the state must be relied upon to hold itself accountable for violating the rights of the governed. Nowhere is this more true than in the context of the prosecution of law enforcement officers for unjustified violence against civilians. The reasons for this are twofold. First, it should go without saying that police perform a vital - and extremely difficult and dangerous - function, and bravely serve as the prophylactic between civil society and complete chaos. As President Obama recently wrote, "[p]olice officers are the heroic backbone of …

Blog Post: Supreme Court Supports Immigrant’S Right To Understand Consequences Of Conviction, Jenny Roberts

Popular Media

The author of the following post about the Supreme Court’s decision in Jae Lee v. United States drafted an amicus brief in the case for several national immigrant rights organizations.

In 2010, Padilla v. Kentucky established that criminal defense lawyers must advise clients about the deportation consequences of a conviction, as part of their duties under the Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel. Jose Padilla won in the Supreme Court because his trial lawyer erroneously informed him that he would not be deported after pleading guilty to drug trafficking because he had been in the U.S. for …

Pimentel V. State, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 31 (June 22, 2017), Ping Chang

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) the challenge-to-fight theory under NRS 200.450 is not vague and overbroad, (2) all bench conferences must be recorded in criminal trials, (3) self-defense is not available as a defense in a violation of NRS 200.450, and (4) an expert witness cannot impeach defendant’s testimony with statements defendant made during court-ordered psychiatric evaluation.

Volume 4 Issue 2 (Complete Spring 2017), David J.. Cook, Zachary Bolitho, Evan Wright, George Steven Swan, Cynthia Brown

Lincoln Memorial University Law Review Archive

A complete version of LMU Law Review Volume Issue 2 for Spring 2017.

Beyond The Money: Expected (And Unexpected) Consequences Of America's War On Drugs, Cynthia Brown

Lincoln Memorial University Law Review Archive

The purpose of this paper is to provide a high-level survey of our nation’s prohibition policies within the context of the costs of the law enforcement efforts upholding those policies. The discussion will offer a cursory review of the economic expense of the war on drugs with tangential coverage of the constitutional, institutional and intangible expenses that are inseparable from an assessment of the costs of America’s drug control efforts. Part I provides a historical review of illicit drug use in the United States, while Part II supplies the evolution of the country’s efforts to codify its drug control policies. …

In Their Defense: Conflict Between The Criminal Defendant’S Right To Counsel Of Choice And The Right To Appointed Counsel, Kit Thomas

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pre- And Post- Conviction Dna Collection Laws In The United States: An Analysis Of Proposed Model Statutes, Xiaochen Hu, Mai E. Naito, Rolando V. Del Carmen

Journal of Criminal Justice and Law

DNA is one of the most powerful molecular tools being widely used in criminal investigations today. Pre- and post-conviction DNA collection laws govern when DNA must be collected, where it is stored, and who has access to the information. Currently, all fifty states have post-conviction DNA collection laws, but only thirty states have enacted pre-conviction DNA collection laws. Details of the procedures and requirements in state statutes vary by state. This study analyzes the current statutes to identify strengths and weaknesses and propose a model statute to standardize DNA collection laws nationwide. By using Herbert Packer’s two models for criminal …

Illegal Marijuana Cultivation On Public Lands: Our Federalism On A Very Bad Trip, Hope M. Babcock

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Fueled by increasing demand for marijuana, illegal cultivation of the drug on public lands is causing massive environmental harm. The federal government lacks the resources to wage what would be a difficult and costly campaign to eradicate these illegal grow sites and instead focuses its limited resources on enforcing the federal marijuana ban. Marijuana decriminalization might allow legally grown marijuana to squeeze out its illegal counterpart, but the political likelihood of decriminalization is low. The key is reducing demand for the illegal drug by changing public buying preferences. However, doing this depends on an available legal alternative. This Article discusses …

The Impact Of Incarceration And Societal Reintegration On Mental Health, Veronica Wicks

Electronic Theses, Projects, and Dissertations

The purpose of this study was to examine ex-offender’s beliefs on the impact of incarceration and societal reintegration on mental health. The study is a qualitative design using interviews that were audio recorded and transcribed for analysis. The study sought to address the relationship between perceptions of mental health and experiences of incarceration and reintegration among formerly incarcerated individuals. The following themes emerged from participant responses: incarceration challenges, mental health stigma, and rehabilitation service accessibility. The findings of this study may contribute to social work practice by providing awareness to the factors impacting ex-offenders’ mental health and interventions needed. The …

Do Muddy Waters Shift Burdens?, Carrie Sperling, Kimberly Holst

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Empirical Assessment Of Georgia’S Beyond A Reasonable Doubt Standard To Determine Intellectual Disability In Capital Cases, Lauren Sudeall Lucas

Georgia State University Law Review

In Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court held that execution of people with intellectual disabilities violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. In doing so, the Court explicitly left to the states the question of which procedures would be used to identify such defendants as exempt from the death penalty. More than a decade before Atkins, Georgia was the first state to bar execution of people with intellectual disability. Yet, of the states that continue to impose the death penalty as a punishment for capital murder, Georgia is the only state that requires capital defendants …

Injustice Under Law: Perpetuating And Criminalizing Poverty Through The Courts, Judge Lisa Foster

Georgia State University Law Review

Money matters in the justice system. If you can afford to purchase your freedom pretrial, if you can afford to immediately pay fines and fees for minor traffic offenses and municipal code violations, if you can afford to hire an attorney, your experience of the justice system both procedurally and substantively will be qualitatively different than the experience of someone who is poor. More disturbingly, through a variety of policies and practices—some of them blatantly unconstitutional—our courts are perpetuating and criminalizing poverty. And when we talk about poverty in the United States, we are still talking about race, ethnicity, and …

A Promise Unfulfilled: Challenges To Georgia’S Death Penalty Statute Post-Furman, William Cody Newsome

Georgia State University Law Review

In Furman v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Furman’s counsel. Three Justices agreed that Georgia law, as applied, was arbitrary and potentially discriminatory. Moreover, one Justice challenged the value of the death penalty and doubted it served any of the alleged purposes for which it was employed.

Although many challenges subsequent to Furman have been raised and arguably resolved by the Court, the underlying challenges raised by Furman appear to remain prevalent with the Court. Justice Breyer recently echoed the concurring opinions of Furman in his dissenting opinion from Glossip v. Gross, when he stated: “In …

Physical Match: Unique Fracture Patterns In Wooden Popsicle Sticks, Yiu Ming Sunny Lau

Themis: Research Journal of Justice Studies and Forensic Science

Physical match (or physical fit) evidence was considered reliable in court for years, until the Daubert case, which required standardized scientific methodology on all forensic evidence. Physical matching faces the same criticism as other forms of physical evidence (specifically, that it lacks a scientific foundation). Physical matching is based on the idea that when an object is fractured, the shape of each fragment is unique and it is not possible to recreate a fragment that is identical to any other. In this study, fifty wooden popsicle sticks were broken in half, the pieces were mixed, and then reconstructed using physical …

Proportionality Skepticism In A Red State, Lauren Sudeall Lucas

Faculty Publications By Year

Commentary on Carol S. Steiker & Jordan M. Steiker, Courting Death: The Supreme Court and Capital Punishment (2016).

A Comparative Approach To Counter-Terrorism Legislation And Legal Policy, Paul David Hill Jr

Senior Honors Theses

Since the 9/11 attacks, American legislation and legal policy in regards to classifying and processing captured terrorists has fallen short of being fully effective and lawful. Trial and error by the Bush and Obama administrations has uncovered two key lessons: (1) captured terrorists are not typical prisoners of war and thus their detainment must involve more legal scrutiny than the latter; and (2) captured terrorists are not ordinary criminals and thus the civilian criminal court system, due to constitutional constraints, is not capable of adequately trying every count of terrorism. Other nations, including France and Israel, approach this problem with …

Stewart V. State, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 20 (May 4, 2017), Margarita Elias

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Before his interrogation, Tommy Laquade Stewart (“Stewart”) was given LVMPD’s Miranda warning pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona.[1] Stewart then agreed to speak with detectives without an attorney. He was subsequently charged and convicted of kidnapping and robbery. On appeal, Stewart argued that there was insufficient evidence to support the convictions and that the Miranda warning was legally insufficient. The Court disagreed and affirmed the district court’s judgment of conviction.

[1] 384 U.S. 436 (1966).

Jail Isolation After Kingsley: Abolishing Solitary Confinement At The Intersection Of Pretrial Incarceration And Emerging Adulthood, Deema Nagib

Fordham Law Review

In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held that allegations of excessive use of force in pretrial detention are subject to an objective standard. However, it is unclear whether the objective standard extends to claims arising out of different factual circumstances. The Second Circuit’s recent decision in Darnell v. Pineiro to extend Kingsley v. Hendrickson to conditions-of- confinement cases provides hope. This Note argues that Kingsley should extend to solitary confinement litigation—particularly the isolation of emerging adults in pretrial detention. Solitary confinement is a widespread practice in the criminal justice system, but the implications of its use in pretrial detention have …

Veterans Banished: The Fight To Bring Them Home, Alejandra Martinez

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

Methamphetamine, Money, And A Motion To Withdraw As Counsel: United States V. Jimenez-Antunez All Boils Down To The Appropriate Standard-, Jessica Haygood

Mercer Law Review

In United States v. Jimenez-Antunez, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that a defendant is not required to show good cause to dismiss his retained counsel, even if the defendant then intends to request appointed counsel. The issue was one of first impression in the Eleventh Circuit, and one that has caused some disagreement between the other circuits. There are distinct differences between the right to appointed counsel and the right to retained counsel under the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution. This case continues to uphold those distinctions by keeping the standards …

Toward A Science Of Torture?, Maxwell Gregg Bloche

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Does torture “work?” Proponents, including President Trump and the architects of CIA “Enhanced Interrogation” say it does, by breaking terrorists' resistance to revealing information that saves lives. Torture's foes typically dismiss this claim as false to the point of fraud--fortuitous coincidence with torture's unlawfulness. Neither view, I argue herein, rests firmly on evidence. Rival anecdotes, not data, have, so far, driven this debate. And a scientific answer is beyond our reach, since: (1) rigorous comparison between interrogation methods that do and don't involve torture isn't possible, and (2) studies of this sort would be transparently unethical. This hasn't stopped the …

Remarks On Campus Sexual Assault, Alison M. Tinsey

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Immigrating While Trans: The Disproportionate Impact Of The Prostitution Ground Of Inadmissibility And Other Provisions Of The Immigration And Nationality Act On Transgender Women, Luis Medina

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

The Unconstitutional Application Of Apprehension And Detention Laws: Section 236(C) Of The Immigration And Nationality Act, Rigoberto Ledesma

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

Drugs Law And Legal Practice In Southeast Asia: Indonesia, Singapore, And Vietnam, Maskun Maskun

Indonesia Law Review

Drugs Law and Legal Practice in Southeast Asia investigates criminal law and practice relevant to drugs regulation in three Southeast Asian jurisdictions: Indonesia, Singapore and Vietnam. These jurisdictions represent the spectrum of approaches to drugs regulation in Southeast Asia, highlighting differences in practice between civil and common law countries, and between liberal and authoritarian states.

Retributive Medication: A Discussion Of A Maine Law Allowing Involuntary, Forcible Medication Of A Pretrial Defendant For The Purpose Of Rendering The Defendant Competent To Stand Trial, Ashley T. Perry

Maine Law Review

Innocent until proven guilty—it’s a phrase we have all heard, know, and accept. But there are circumstances where this simple concept is strained in its application, such as when a legally incompetent defendant is facing trial. After all, how can a defendant be proven guilty if he cannot stand trial? The Supreme Court of the United States has determined that forcibly medicating an incompetent defendant solely to render the defendant competent to stand trial is permissible under the Federal Constitution. However, the Federal Constitution provides only the floor-level of civil rights; states are free to set their own ceilings. The …