Criminal Law Commons^™

A Justified Obligation: Counsel’S Duty To File A Requested Appeal In A Post-Waiver Situation, Lauren Gregorcyk

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Dog Days Of Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Kit Kinports

NULR Online

No abstract provided.

Teaching 'The Wire': Fiction As Pedagogical Tool, Roger Fairfax

Presentations

No abstract provided.

Summary Of State V. Greene, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 58, Brittnie Watkins

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered an appeal from a district court order granting respondent’s post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Banished For Life: Deportation Of Juvenile Offenders As Cruel And Unusual Punishment, Beth Caldwell

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Brass V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 53, Katelyn J. Cantu

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered whether an attorney may file a substantive motion on a deceased client's behalf in a criminal case when a personal representative has not been substituted as a party to the appeal.

Summary Of Armenta-Carpio V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 54, Drew Wheaton

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered whether a concession-of-guilt strategy is equivalent to a guilty plea, thus requiring the district court to canvass a defendant to determine whether he knowingly and voluntarily consented to the concession of guilt.

Summary Of State V. Robles-Nieves, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 55, Sean Africk

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered the appropriate factors for evaluating a motion for the stay of a criminal proceeding pending the resolution of an interlocutory appeal from an order granting a motion to suppress evidence.

Summary Of State V. Beckman, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 51, Daniel Nubel

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a district court order granting a motion to suppress evidence. The Court clarified the government’s ability to subject citizens to drug sniffing dogs in the absence of reasonable suspicion.

Summary Of Clay V. Eighth Judicial District Court, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 48, Katelyn Franklin

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered a petition for a writ of mandamus challenging an order from the district court denying a pretrial petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The question before the Court was whether a district attorney violates NRS 172.095(2) when he or she seeks an indictment for child abuse or neglect under NRS 200.508(1),2 based on nonaccidental physical injury, but fails to inform the grand jurors of the definition of “physical injury.”

Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens

Seattle University Law Review

This survey is intended to serve as a resource to which Washington lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, and others can turn as an authoritative starting point for researching Washington search and seizure law. In order to be useful as a research tool, this Survey requires periodic updates to address new cases interpreting the Washington constitution and the U.S. Constitution and to reflect the current state of the law. Many of these cases involve the Washington State Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Washington constitution. Also, as the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to examine Fourth Amendment search and seizure jurisprudence, its …

Order, Technology And The Constitutional Meanings Of Criminal Procedure, Thomas P. Crocker

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Shoot To Kill: A Critical Look At Stand Your Ground Laws, Tamara Rice Lave

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Risky Interplay Of Tort And Criminal Law: Punitive Damages, Daniel M. Braun

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article examines the evolving role of punitive damages in U.S. jurisprudence, highlighting their transformation from a compensatory tool for intangible harms to a primarily punitive and deterrent measure. This shift has blurred the lines between tort and criminal law, leading to constitutional challenges and difficulties in managing these damages through Supreme Court-established guideposts. The analysis concludes that the integration of punitive damages into private law creates inherent tensions and suggests that their abolition might be necessary to maintain legal clarity and justice.

Shtanger V. Speaker Of The Knesset, Asher Grunis, Hanan Melcer, Elyakim Rubinstein

Translated Opinions

[This abstract is not part of the Court's opinion and is provided for the reader's convenience. It has been translated from a Hebrew version prepared by Nevo Press Ltd. and is used with its kind permission.]

A petition which focuses on the question of the legality of two arrangements in the Criminal Procedure (Enforcement Powers – Detention) Law, 5756-1996 (hereinafter: the "Detention Law") which were added to the Detention Law, in the framework of Amendment no. 8 to the Law, which was legislated by the Knesset on March 14. 2011. The first arrangement amends Section 53 of the Detention Law. …

Searching For Solutions To The Indigent Defense Crisis In The Broader Criminal Justice Reform Agenda, Roger Fairfax

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

As we mark the fiftieth anniversary of the Gideon v. Wainwright decision, the nearly universal assessment is that our indigent defense system remains too under-resourced and overwhelmed to fulfill the promise of the landmark decision, and needs to be reformed. At the same time, fiscal necessity and moral outrage have prompted a historic reexamination of outdated policies that have led to an overreliance on incarceration and inefficiencies in the administration of criminal justice. This Essay argues that there are synergies between the indigent defense reform agenda and the broader criminal justice reform agenda, which places a premium on cost-effective, evidence-based, …

The Plea-Bargain Crisis For Noncitizens In Misdemeanor Court, Jason A. Cade

Cardozo Law Review

This Article considers three factors contributing to a plea-bargain crisis for noncitizens charged with misdemeanors: 1) the expansion of deportation laws to include very minor offenses with little opportunity for discretionary relief from removal; 2) the integration of federal immigration enforcement programs with the criminal justice system; and 3) the institutional norms in non-federal lower criminal courts, where little attention is paid to evidence or individual equities and where bail and other process costs generally outweigh perceived incentives to fight charges. The Article contends that these factors increase the likelihood that a noncitizen's low-level conviction will not reliably indicate guilt …

Sharpening The Tools Of An Adequate Defense: Providing For The Appointment Of Experts For Indigent Defendants In Child Death Cases Under Ake V. Oklahoma, Laurel Gilbert

San Diego Law Review

This Comment proposes that because of ongoing concerns regarding the reliability and validity of forensic science in the United States, the Due Process Clause constitutionally mandates the appointment of forensic experts for indigent defendants in criminal cases arising out of a child’s death if the prosecution relies on forensic evidence. Part II of this Comment provides an overview of the current law governing the admissibility of forensic expert testimony in criminal cases and explains why these admissibility standards create a need for the appointment of defense forensic experts to protect the rights of criminal defendants. Part III then discusses Due …

Wrongful Death And Survival Actions For Torts In Violation Of International Law, Alastair J. Agcaoili

San Diego Law Review

This Article aims to make sense of this neglected area of ATS law. I contend that the salient issue in these deceased-victim cases is not whether the nonvictim plaintiffs have standing to sue but rather whether they have a viable cause of action in the first place. Standing and cause of action concepts have an uneasy relationship in law. Although the distinction between constitutional standing and cause of action inquiries is well established, the division is less clear where, as here, standing doctrine is used to define a plaintiff’s eligibility to bring suit. Indeed, reliance on standing terminology in this …

Protecting Juveniles' Right To Remain Silent: Dangers Of The Thompkins Rule And Recommendations For Reform, Lauren Gottesman

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Book Review: Errol Morris, “A Wilderness Of Error”: Provocative But Unpersuasive, Richard C. Cahn

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Admissibility Of Cell Site Location Information In Washington Courts, Ryan W. Dumm

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment principally explores when and how a party can successfully admit cell cite location information into evidence. Beginning with the threshold inquiry of relevance, Part III examines when cell site location information is relevant and in what circumstances the information, though relevant, could be unfairly prejudicial, cumulative, or confusing. Part IV provides the bulk of the analysis, which centers on the substantive foundation necessary to establish the information’s credibility and authenticity. Part V looks at three ancillary issues: hearsay, a criminal defendant’s Sixth Amendment confrontation rights, and the introduction of a summary of voluminous records. Finally, Part VI offers …

“Lonesome Road”: Driving Without The Fourth Amendment, Lewis R. Katz

Seattle University Law Review

The protections of the Fourth Amendment on the streets and highways of America have been drastically curtailed. This Article traces the debasement of Fourth Amendment protections on the road and how the Fourth Amendment’s core value of preventing arbitrary police behavior has been marginalized. This Article contends that the existence of a traffic offense should not be the end of the inquiry but the first step, and that defendants should be able to challenge the reasonableness even when there is proof of a traffic offense.

Inchoate Crimes Revisted: A Behavioral Economics Perspective, Manuel A. Utset

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Carter V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 26, Brittany Puzey

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Whether a suspect who asks, “Can I get an attorney?” after he has been advised of his rights under Miranda , unambiguously invokes his right to counsel, and if so, whether the State can resume the interrogation of the suspect by reading him a second set of Miranda warnings and obtaining an otherwise valid waiver.

Summary Of Slaatte V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 23, David H. Rigdon

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An appeal from a judgment of conviction that imposed restitution in an uncertain amount. Slaatte argued that Nevada law requires that a district court set a fixed amount of restitution when it determines that restitution is appropriate as part of a sentence.

Summary Of Patterson V. State Of Nevada, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 17, Brittnie Watkins

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered an appeal from a jury verdict convicting the defendant of conspiracy to commit murder, murder with the use of a deadly weapon and discharging a firearm at a vehicle.

Summary Of Gonzalez V. Dist. Ct., 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 22, Michael Esposito

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This is an original writ of mandamus challenging the ruling of the Eight Judicial District Court of Nevada denying the motion to dismiss of the petitioner, Leopoldo Gonzalez. Gonzalez’s motion sought to dismiss criminal information under the Double Jeopardy Clause and collateral estoppel rule.

Summary Of Truesdell V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 20, Sean Africk

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered an appeal from a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a jury verdict, of invasion of the home in violation of a temporary protection order.

Physician Participation In Executions, The Morality Of Capital Punishment, And The Practical Implications Of Their Relationship, Paul J. Litton

Faculty Publications

Evidence that some executed prisoners suffered excruciating pain has reinvigorated the ethical debate about physician participation in lethal injections. In widely publicized litigation, death row inmates argue that the participation of anesthesiologists in their execution is constitutionally required to minimize the risk of unnecessary suffering. For many years, commentators supported the ethical ban on physician participation reflected in codes of professional medical organizations. However, a recent wave of scholarship concurs with inmate advocates, urging the law to require or at least permit physician participation.