Criminal Law Commons^™

Moral Touchstone, Not General Deterrence: The Role Of International Criminal Justice In Fostering Compliance With International Humanitarian Law, Chris Jenks

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article contends that international criminal justice provides minimal general deterrence of future violations of international humanitarian law (IHL). Arguments that international courts and tribunals deter future violations – and that such deterrence is a primary objective – assume an internally inconsistent burden that the processes cannot bear, in essence setting international criminal justice up for failure. Moreover, the inherently limited number of proceedings, the length of time required, the dense opinions generated, the relatively light sentences and the robust confinement conditions all erode whatever limited general deterrence international criminal justice might otherwise provide. Bluntly stated, thousands of pages of …

A Dedication To Andrew E. Taslitz: "It's All About The Egyptians," And Maybe Tinkerbell Too, Stephen E. Henderson

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process Disaggregation, Jason Parkin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

One-size-fits-all procedural safeguards are becoming increasingly suspect under the Due Process Clause. Although the precise requirements of due process vary from context to context, the Supreme Court has held that, within any particular context, the Due Process Clause merely requires one-size-fits-all procedures that are designed according to the needs of the average or typical person using the procedures. As the Court explained when announcing the modern approach to procedural due process in Mathews v. Eldridge, the due process calculus must be focused on “the generality of cases, not the rare exceptions.” A more granular approach to due process rules, the …

The Prosecutor’S Contribution To Wrongful Convictions, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

A prosecutor is viewed by the public as a powerful law enforcement official whose responsibility is to convict guilty people of crimes. But not everybody understands that a prosecutor’s function is not only to win convictions of law-breakers. A prosecutor is a quasi-judicial official who has a duty to promote justice to the entire community, including those people charged with crimes. Indeed, an overriding function of a prosecutor is to ensure that innocent people not get convicted and punished.

A prosecutor is constitutionally and ethically mandated to promote justice. The prosecutor is even considered a "Minister of Justice" who has …

Reflections On The Indictment Of Sitting Heads Of State And Government And Its Consequences For Peace And Stability And Reconciliation In Africa, Charles Chernor Jalloh

Articles

In these remarks, the author considers the most recent challenge to the application of international criminal justice in Africa: Kenya's controversial November 2013 proposal to amend the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to temporarily exempt from prosecution sitting presidents accused of involvement with international crimes. He examines several legal and practical reasons why such a proposal is untenable. Instead, citing the principle of complementarity and urging the principled use of judicial and prosecutorial discretion, he contends that much of the African Union's current concerns about the Kenya Situation can be addressed within the confines of existing Rome Law. …

Marxist And Soviet Law, Stephen C. Thaman

All Faculty Scholarship

This chapter addresses both the Marxist critique of law before the Russian Revolution and the development of the Soviet Law Structure. It discusses the three main trends in Soviet Criminal Law before elucidating how these trends affected the General Part and the Special Part of Soviet Criminal Codes and overall Soviet criminal policy.

Abolishing Jailhouse Snitch Testimony, Russell D. Covey

Faculty Publications By Year

Jailhouse snitch testimony is inherently unreliable. Snitches have powerful incentives to invent incriminating lies about other inmates in often well-founded hopes that such testimony will provide them with material benefits, including in many cases substantial reduction of criminal charges against them or of the time they are required to serve. At the same time, false snitch testimony is difficult, if not altogether impossible, for criminal defendants to impeach. Because such testimony usually pits the word of two individuals against one another, both of whose credibility is suspect, jurors have little ability to accurately or effectively assess or weigh the evidence. …

The Time Has Come For A Restatement Of Child Sex Abuse, Marci A. Hamilton

Articles

No abstract provided.

Finality And Rehabilitation, Meghan J. Ryan

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

New science and evolving societal views have led commentators to question the doctrine of finality. This parallels commentators’ embrace of rehabilitation during the middle of the last century. Today, casting off the strictures of finality and embracing rehabilitation are considered complementary positions, but finality has historically been understood as promoting rehabilitation. This shift stems from our changing understandings of rehabilitation. Rehabilitation focuses on offender change — on whether an offender is a final product or, rather, whether he is capable of transformation. Offender change, though, could be either change in character or change in behavior, or a combination of these …

A Second Chance: Rebiography As Just Compensation, Jamila Jefferson-Jones

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Executing Whiteness: Fictional And Nonfictional Accounts Of Capital Punishment In The United States, 1915-1940, Daniel Lachance

Studio for Law and Culture

Over the course of the nineteenth century, elites in the United States increasingly sought to privatize executions and rationalize execution protocols. The source of this change is well known to historians of punishment: a fear that public executions had become unwieldy spectacles drove state actors to move these events into jail yards, at first, and then, with the advent of new technologies, into the interior of centralized prisons that were often far from the county in which the crime had occurred. The centralization of executions and the rationalization of execution protocols reflected and reinforced a more bureaucratic image of the …

The Attrition Of Rights Under Parole, Tonja Jacobi, Song Richardson, Gregory Barr

Faculty Articles

We conduct a detailed doctrinal and empirical study of the adverse effects of parole on the constitutional rights of both individual parolees and the communities in which they live. We show that parolees' Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights have been eroded by a multitude of punitive conditions endorsed by the courts. Punitive parole conditions actually increase parolees' vulnerability to criminal elements, and thus likely worsen recidivism. Simultaneously, the parole system broadly undermines the rights of nonparolees, including family members, cotenants, and communities. We show that police target parolee-dense neighborhoods for additional Terry stops, even when income, race, population, and …

The Cure For Young Prosecutors' Syndrome, Ronald F. Wright, Kay L. Levine

Faculty Articles

Although legal scholars treat prosecutors like interchangeable parts, we argue—based on interviews and surveys of over 200 state prosecutors in eight offices—that scholars should be alert to the differences among them, because new prosecutors experience their professional role differently than their veteran colleagues do. This divergence happens because, as new prosecutors gain experience, their professional identities shift—they become more balanced over time. This Article explores the prosecutor’s professional transformation and the possible catalysts for that change.

When experienced prosecutors describe their career trajectories, they regret the highly adversarial posture they adopted earlier in their careers. While the constant quest for …

Kidnapping Incorporated: The Unregulated Youth-Transportation Industry And The Potential For Abuse, Ira Robbins

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Strangers come into a child's room in the middle of the night, drag her kicking and screaming into a van, apply handcuffs, and drive her to a behavior modification facility at a distant location. What sounds like a clear-cut case of kidnapping is complicated by the fact that the child's parents not only authorized this intervention, but also paid for it. This scarcely publicized practice-known as the youth-transportation industry-operates on the fringes of existing law. The law generally presumes that parents have almost unlimited authority over their children, but the youth-transportation industry has never been closely examined regarding exactly what …

Getting Jurors To Awesome, Cortney E. Lollar

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

A 2011 American Bar Association report on the death penalty in Kentucky revealed that a shocking two-thirds of the 78 people sentenced to death in Kentucky since reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976 have had their sentences overturned on appeal. Kentucky’s reversal rate is more than twice the national average, with a 31% reversal rate in capital cases and almost four times the 17% national reversal rate in all other case types. With a sentence as irreversible as death, troubling does not begin to describe the depth of concern many experience when viewing such a startling statistic.

A closer …

Creating Constitutional Procedure: Frye, Lafler, And Plea Bargaining Reform, Mike Work

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

No abstract provided.

The New Prosecutor’S Dilemma: Prosecutorial Ethics And The Evaluation Of Actual Innocence, Dana Carver Boehm

Utah Law Review

Buoyed by advances in forensic science, the number of postconviction exonerations has significantly risen in the American criminal justice system over the last twenty years. The ethical obligations of prosecutors faced with such claims, however, have not kept pace. Most efforts within district and U.S. attorneys’ offices have been incremental at best, and even those few prosecutors’ offices with more robust “conviction integrity units”—units that affirmatively investigate claims of actual innocence and seek to mitigate the likelihood of wrongful convictions in the first place—suffer from various structural defects. Often a prosecutor’s default posture when faced with a claim of actual …

Objective Mens Rea And Attenuated Subjectivism: Guidance From Justice Charron In R. V. Beatty, Palma Paciocco

Articles & Book Chapters

Justin Ronald Beatty was driving on the Trans-Canada Highway on July 23, 2003 when, for no apparent reason, his truck suddenly crossed the solid centre line and collided with an oncoming car, killing three people. Beatty was charged with dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death. He was acquitted at trial on the grounds that his momentary lapse of attention was not enough to establish fault. The Crown appealed, and the Court of Appeal ordered a new trial after concluding that the trial judge had misapplied the fault standard. Beatty appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, which undertook …

From Villa Grimaldi To Guantánamo Bay: Remedying Human Rights Abuses In Chile And The United States, Nadia Shamsi

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article examines the effectiveness of transitional justice mechanisms in addressing human rights abuses, using Chile's experience under Augusto Pinochet as a model. It critiques the U.S. for failing to adopt similar approaches to accountability, particularly in addressing abuses at Guantanamo Bay and other detention centers. The analysis highlights the importance of combining truth commissions, criminal prosecutions, and reparations to achieve justice and promote democratic transition. It argues that the U.S. must align its domestic practices with the international human rights standards it promotes.

Some Thoughts On The Fundamentals Of An Evidence Code From The U.S. American Perspective, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In the U.S. American trial system proof mainly consists of live witnesses presented in open court under oath before the judge, jury, and parties, subject to perjury laws. Cross-examination of the witnesses in that setting is the principal (though not the only) form of testing their reliability. It is for these reasons that we have a rule against hearsay (second-hand reporting in court of what someone has said outside of court).

Consensual Police-Citizen Encounters: Human Factors Of A Reasonable Person And Individual Bias., Evan M. Mcguire

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

The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable government intrusion. The government must establish probable cause and obtain a warrant to search a particular location. However, there are minute Fourth Amendment distinctions at various levels of police-citizen interaction which act as exceptions to the general rule. Officers may approach a citizen for any reason as long as a reasonable person in their place would feel able to escape the officer’s advances. Ultimately, abuse of this exception to Fourth Amendment protections occurs frequently, especially when it comes to minority populations. The police can conduct a search without a warrant if there is reasonable …

Sentencing Terrorist Crimes, Wadie E. Said

Publications

The legal framework behind the sentencing of individuals convicted of committing terrorist crimes has received little scholarly attention, even with the proliferation of such prosecutions in the eleven years following the attacks of September 11, 2001. This lack of attention is particularly striking in light of the robust and multifaceted scholarship that deals with the challenges inherent in criminal sentencing more generally, driven in no small part by the comparatively large number of sentencing decisions issued by the United States Supreme Court over the past thirteen years. Reduced to its essence, the Supreme Court's sentencing jurisprudence requires district courts to …

A Dedication To Andrew E. Taslitz: “It’S All About The Egyptians,” And Maybe Tinkerbell Too, Stephen Henderson

Other Faculty Publications

This brief memorial remembers Andy's incredible friendship and service, and explains why this Symposium volume is so appropriately dedicated to his memory.

Forget Sentencing Equality: Moving From The “Cracked” Cocaine Debate Toward Particular Purpose Sentencing, Jelani Jefferson Exum

Faculty Publications

While a racial equality-themed discourse has traditionally fueled the crack-versus-powder cocaine sentencing debate, this Article asserts that seeking equality in sentencing outcomes is the wrong goal. This Article argues that reformers seeking racial equality in sentencing are misguided in using the cocaine sentencing standards as a benchmark of fairness, because the current cocaine sentencing standards do not effectively serve the purposes of punishment. Rather than focusing on equality, this Article advocates implementing Particular Purpose Sentencing, which involves developing a framework for drug offenses to be analyzed individually and matched with punishments that purposefully address the concerns associated with the particular …

Blind Injustice: The Supreme Court, Implicit Racial Bias, And The Racial Disparity In The Criminal Justice System, Tyler Rose Clemons

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” This statement by Chief Justice John Roberts in 2007 is alluring in both its grammatical symmetry and its logical simplicity. Yet it encapsulates the naiveté of the view of racial discrimination currently held by the majority of the justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Chief Justice Roberts’s assertion contains the implied assumption that the only racial discrimination that exists—or at least the only kind that matters under the Constitution—is explicit and susceptible to conscious control. Decades of …

Impeachment By Unreliable Conviction, Anna Roberts

Faculty Publications

This Article offers a new critique of Federal Rule of Evidence 609, which permits impeachment of criminal defendants by means of their prior criminal convictions. In admitting convictions as impeachment evidence, courts are wrongly assuming that such convictions are necessarily reliable indicators of relative culpability. Courts assume that convictions are the product of a fair fight, that they demonstrate relative culpability, and that they connote moral culpability. But current prosecutorial practice and other data undermine each of these assumptions. Accordingly, this Article proposes that before a conviction is used for impeachment, there should be an assessment of the extent to …

We Are Not Who We Pretend To Be: Odr Alternatives To Online Impersonation Statutes, Kori Clanton

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

This Note focuses on how online dispute resolution ("ODR") processes, as opposed to litigation, offer a more efficient and effective legal solution to resolving online impersonation disputes. The purpose of this Note is to analyze the measures state legislatures and social media websites have implemented to combat online impersonation cases, and to propose a practical ODR solution that will eliminate the burdens of litigation and provide a cost-efficient and time-effective remedy. Section I provides an introduction to the current relevance and rising incidents of online impersonation via social media websites such as Facebook and Twitter. Section II explores the historical …

Text Me: A Text-Based Interpretation Of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(E), Jennifer L. Case

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Reforming California Sentencing Practice And Policy: Are We There Yet?, Michael Vitiello

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests Or Rigid Rules?, Kit Kinports

Faculty Scholarship

This piece argues that the Supreme Court's April 2014 decision in Navarette v. Calfornia, like last Term's opinion in Florida v. Harris, deviates from longstanding Supreme Court precedent treating probable cause and reasonable suspicion as totality-of-the-circumstances tests. Instead, these two recent rulings essentially rely on rigid rules to define probable cause and reasonable suspicion. The article criticizes the Court for selectively endorsing bright-line tests that favor the prosecution, and argues that both decisions generate rules that oversimplify and therefore tend to be overinclusive.