Criminal Law Commons^™

Punishing Family Status , Jennifer M. Collins, Ethan J. Leib, Dan Markel

Faculty Scholarship

This Article focuses upon two basic but under-explored questions: when does, and when should, the state use the criminal justice apparatus to burden individuals on account of their familial status? We address the first question in Part I by revealing a variety of laws permeating the criminal justice system that together form a string of family ties burdens, laws that impose punishment upon individuals on account of their familial status. The seven burdens we train our attention upon are omissions liability for failure to rescue, parental responsibility laws, incest, bigamy, adultery, nonpayment of child support, and nonpayment of parental support. …

Guilty Pleas Or Trials: Which Does The Barrister Prefer?, Peter W. Tague

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Barristers in England and attorneys in the United States have been upbraided for pursuing their interests to their clients' detriment in recommending guilty pleas over trials. While this accusation against American attorneys could be true since their incentives are sometimes skewed to favor guilty pleas, it is not accurate with respect to barristers in England. This is because the latter’s selfish incentives--to maximize income and avoid sanction--incline them to prefer trials over guilty pleas. In Melbourne and Sydney, barristers have never been similarly accused. Indeed, the topic has not been studied. Based on interviews with legal professionals in those cities, …

Envisioning Post-Conviction Review For The Twenty-First Century, Joseph L. Hoffmann, Nancy J. King

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The More Things Change: A Psychological Case Against Allowing The Federal Sentencing Guidelines To Stay The Same In Light Of Gall, Kimbrough, And New Understandings Of Reasonableness Review, Jelani Jefferson Exum

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In December 2007, through two decisions, the Supreme Court sought to clean up the confusion that it created just shy of three years earlier when it rendered the Federal Sentencing Guidelines advisory in United States v. Booker and called for circuit courts to begin reviewing sentences for "unreasonableness." In one of those December decisions, Gall v. United States, the Court clarified what it meant by reasonableness review and explained that such review had both a procedural and substantive component. In the other decision, Kimbrough v. United States, the Court gave more meaning to the substantive component, …

In Whose "Best Interests"? – An International And Comparative Assessment Of Us Rules On Sentencing Of Juveniles, Jelani Jefferson Exum, John W. Head

Faculty Publications

According to numerous sources, both at the international level and within the USA, legal standards governing the treatment of children (commonly defined as persons under 18 years old)—including their treatment at the hands of the judicial system—should reflect an assessment of "the best interests of the child". An explicit announcement of this principle at the international level appears in the Convention on the Rights of the Child ("CRC"), which nearly all countries in the world have adopted. Article 37 of the CRC elaborates on the "best interests" principle, by prescribing six key standards national juvenile justice systems are to follow …

Due Process For The Global Crime Era: A Proposal, Song Richardson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This article argues that the adjudication of transnational criminal cases in the United States raises troubling questions about the government's commitment to principled criminal process standards. Concern over global crime has resulted in a criminal process that inadequately protects fairness and legitimacy norms. Over 40 years ago, in his seminal work on the domestic criminal process, Herbert Packer described two models of criminal procedure: the crime control model and the due process model. The crime control model posits that the most important function of the criminal justice system is to suppress crime. The due process model focuses on the fallibility …

Criminal Procedure In Perspective, Kit Kinports

Faculty Scholarship

This Article attempts to situate the Supreme Court's constitutional criminal procedure jurisprudence in the academic debates surrounding the reasonable person standard, in particular, the extent to which objective standards should incorporate a particular individual's subjective characteristics. Analyzing the Supreme Court's search and seizure and confessions opinions, I find that the Court shifts opportunistically from case to case between subjective and objective tests, and between whose point of view - the police officer's or the defendant's - it views as controlling. Moreover, these deviations cannot be explained either by the principles the Court claims underlie the various constitutional provisions at issue …

Cross Dressing And The Criminal, Bennett Capers

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Strict Liability And Negligent Rape: Or How I Learned To Start Worrying And Question The Criminal Justice System, Dini Rosenbaum

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note critiques strict liability and negligent rape standards, advocating for a more nuanced approach that prioritizes subjective fault and societal education to address the limitations of current rape laws. It emphasizes the need to align legal standards with the defendant's actual state of mind while addressing systemic barriers to justice, particularly in date rape cases. The analysis highlights the gap between legal reforms and their practical application, suggesting that education could be a more effective tool for prevention than relying solely on legal changes.

Reporting Sexual Assault Of Women In The Military, Jodie Friedman

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note examines the underreporting of sexual assaults in the military and the impact of policy changes aimed at addressing this issue. It highlights the challenges faced by victims, including fears of retaliation and the lack of confidentiality, and evaluates the effectiveness of the 2005 restricted reporting policy. The analysis suggests that while progress has been made, systemic issues persist, and further reforms are needed to protect victims' rights and ensure justice.

Jury Trial And Adversary Procedure In Russia: Reform Of Soviet Inquisitorial Procedure Or Democratic Window-Dressing?, Stephen C. Thaman

All Faculty Scholarship

A new adversary system of jury trial was introduced in 1993-1994, and the rights to jury trial, adversary procedure, the presumption of innocence, and the mandatory exclusion of illegally gathered evidence were incorporated into the new Constitution of the Russian Federation in December of 1993. The new Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, passed in December 2001, led to the extension of jury trial to the entire country with the exception of the Republic of Chechnia in 2003-2004.

This chapter explores the extent to which the Russian jury system and adversary procedure have humanized criminal procedure, and concludes that …

Arbitrary Detention: Whither - Or Wither? - Section 9, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

It is a remarkable fact that more than 25 years after the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into effect, we still have no section 9 jurisprudence. It is not that there have been no decisions at all concerning the right not to be arbitrarily detained, of course, but taken in total they do not come anywhere near setting out an analytical framework. This stands in contrast to most other legal rights in the Charter. Section 7 jurisprudence has established the two-step approach to take in assessing claims under that section, including a three-step test for determining whether a …

Improving Privacy Protection, But By How Much?, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The discussion of reasonable expectation of privacy in R. v. M. (A.) is extremely useful. In the wake of Tessling, many courts had effectively reduced the protection offered by s. 8 based on two arguments: that what was detected was an emanation in the public domain similar to heat coming from a house, and that what was discovered merely related to informational privacy and was not part of the biographical core of such data. Justice Binnie's decision puts paid the notion that either of these arguments is a trump card. He suggests that generalizing about "emanations" is not a useful …

Reforming Homicide Law To Separate Guilt From Sentence: An International Gloss, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

This article argues that Canadian homicide law is handicapped by trying to combine two contradictory approaches. In general, Canadian criminal law adopts the approach of setting out relatively rigid rules for determining guilt or innocence. That is, the Criminal Code sets out particular offences, and if the elements of an offence can be proven, then failing the presence of any defence (also relatively rigidly defined), any accused will be found guilty. The question of guilt or innocence is not individualized to the circumstances of the offender. On the other hand, sentencing decisions adopt exactly the opposite approach, and are made …

The End Of Constitutional Exemptions, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

In R. v. Ferguson (reported ante p. 197) the Supreme Court decided that constitutional exemptions are not available as a remedy when a mandatory minimum sentence is said to violate section 12 of the Charter. This is a well reasoned and sensible decision. As mandatory minimum sentences are the context in which the possibility of the constitutional exemption as a Charter remedy has most frequently arisen, as a practical matter Ferguson largely disposes of the issue. Nonetheless, a further clarification at some point that constitutional exemptions are not available in any context, for other violations of section 12 or of …

Harmless Constitutional Error And The Institutional Significance Of The Jury, Roger Fairfax

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Appellate harmless error review, an early twentieth-century innovation prompted by concerns of efficiency and finality, had been confined to nonconstitutional trial errors until forty years ago, when the U.S. Supreme Court extended the harmless error rule to trial errors of constitutional proportion. Even as criminal procedural protections were expanded in the latter half of the twentieth century, the harmless error rule operated to dilute the effect of many of these constitutional guarantees-the Sixth Amendment right to jury trial being no exception. However, while a tradeoff between important process values and the Constitution's protection of individual rights is inherent in the …

Grand Jury Discretion And Constitutional Design, Roger Fairfax

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The grand jury possesses an unqualified power to decline to indict - despite probable cause that alleged criminal conduct has occurred. A grand jury might exercise this power, for example, to disagree with the wisdom of a criminal law or its application to a particular defendant. A grand jury might also use its discretionary power to send a message of disapproval regarding biased or unwise prosecutorial decisions or inefficient allocation of law enforcement resources in the community. This ability to exercise discretion on bases beyond the sufficiency of the evidence has been characterized pejoratively as grand jury nullification. The dominant …

In Memoriam: Francis A. Allen, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Francis A. Allen graced the law faculties of five universities in the course of a remarkable, forty-six-year teaching career. In that time, he established himself as one of the half-dozen greatest twentieth century American scholars of criminal law and criminal procedure.

The Cultural Defense: Reflections In Light Of The Model Penal Code And The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Kent Greenawalt

Faculty Scholarship

Much of this essay is an inquiry into just how cultural factors might figure in claims about elements of offenses, justifications, excuses, and mitigations under the Model Penal Code – still the most comprehensive and systematic code of criminal law in the United States. That exploration gives us a sense of how culture may matter for criminal liability absent a specifically labeled "cultural defense"; it also provides an idea of how much could be accomplished by expansions of the standard defenses.

In the latter part of the essay, I think about cultural practices as a potential justification or generalized exemption …

Legitmacy And Criminal Justice, Jeffrey A. Fagan

Faculty Scholarship

Surveys of public opinion over four decades consistently show that Americans have little confidence in the fairness or effectiveness of the criminal justice system and criminal law more generally. This crisis of confidence is most acute among racial minorities: surveys show that more than one in three Whites have little confidence in the police, compared to more than half of Black respondents. Both the lack of confidence and the racial breach in perceptions of the law and legal actors have persisted for nearly four decades, regardless of whether crime was rising or falling.

But we might reasonably ask whether and …

Beyond Discretion: Prosecution, The Logic Of Sovereignty, And The Limits Of Law, Conor Clarke, Austin Sarat

Scholarship@WashULaw

Today it is widely recognized in both academic literature and the main-stream media that prosecutors have substantial discretion. Yet prosecutorial decisions involve, in our view, something more than a straightforward exercise of discretion. In this article we move from the language of discretion to that of sovereignty to describe prosecutorial power. In so doing we want to move from the language of administration to the language of power. Focusing on the decision not to prosecute, we argue that prosecutorial decisions participate in, and exemplify, the logic of sovereignty and its complex relationship to legality. By drawing on Carl Schmitt and …

Pretrial And Preventative Detention Of Suspected Terrorists: Options And Constraints Under International Law, Douglass Cassel

Journal Articles

This article analyzes the grounds, procedures and conditions required by International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law for pretrial detention of suspected terrorists for purposes of criminal law enforcement, and for their preventive detention for security and intelligence purposes. Recognizing the difficulties in securing sufficient admissible evidence to prosecute terrorists within the tight time limits imposed by international law, the Article nonetheless suggests that indefinite detention, solely or primarily for purposes of intelligence interrogation, is probably not lawful under U.S. or international law. Preventive detention for security purposes, on the other hand, is generally permitted by international law, provided …

Congressional Oversight Of National Security Activities: Improving Information Funnels, Heidi Kitrosser

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Beyond Intention, Kimberly Kessler Ferzan

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bringing An End To Warrantless Cell Phone Searches, Bryan A. Stillwagon

Georgia Law Review

Cell phones keep society connected, and exploring their contents reveals a glimpse into the user's life. As technology develops and these phones advance, this glimpse becomes a more complete picture of the user's life. The Fourth Amendment speaks of a right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures, but this right is threatened when judges permit the few exceptions to the warrant requirement to envelop the general rule. This Note begins with a brief review of the history of both cellphones and warrantless searches, followed by the recent history of warrantless cell phone searches. While focusing on the search- …

A New Era Of Federal Sentencing: The Guidelines Provide District Court Judges A Cloak, But Is Gall Their Dagger?, Anna E. Papa

Georgia Law Review

Federal district court judges today have a level of sentencing discretion that has been unknown since the adoption of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. This Note reviews the history of the Guidelines and outlines the problems that have resulted from the Supreme Court's decisions in Booker, Rita, and Gall This Note argues that the confusion may be clarified by giving effect to the text of 18 U.S.C. §3553(a), which requires that federal district court judges impose sentences that are sufficient, but not greater than necessary, and requires them to examine all the factors provided in the statute. The court's recent …

Introduction: The Challenge Of Lionel Tate, Elizabeth S. Scott, Laurence Steinberg

Faculty Scholarship

Legal reforms over the past generation have transformed juvenile crime regulation from a system that viewed most youth crime as the product of immaturity into one that is ready to hold many youths to the standard of accountability imposed on adults. Supporters of these reforms argue that they are simply a response to the inability of the traditional juvenile court to deal adequately with violent youth crime, but the legal changes that have transformed the system have often been undertaken in an atmosphere of moral panic, with little deliberation about consequences and costs.

In this book we argue that a …

Abolition In The U.S.A. By 2050: On Political Capital And Ordinary Acts Of Resistance, Bernard E. Harcourt

Faculty Scholarship

The United States, like the larger international community, likely will tend toward greater abolition of the death penalty during the first half of the twenty-first century. A handful of individual states – states that have historically carried out few or no executions – probably will abolish capital punishment over the next twenty years, which will create political momentum and ultimately a federal constitutional ban on capital punishment in the United States. It is entirely reasonable to expect that, by the mid-twenty-first century, capital punishment will have the same status internationally as torture: an outlier practice, prohibited by international agreements and …

Letting Guidelines Be Guidelines (And Judges Be Judges), Gerard E. Lynch

Faculty Scholarship

In a prescient New York Times op-ed piece entitled "Let Guidelines be Guidelines," written in response to the Supreme Court's decision in Blakely v. Washington, before certiorari was granted in United States v. Booker, Bill Stuntz of Harvard and Kate Stith Cabranes of Yale urged that the best solution for the constitutional crisis facing the United States Sentencing Guidelines would be to treat the Guidelines as guidelines, and not as a straightjacket. The Supreme Court evidently took a similar view, deciding in Booker that the Guidelines were constitutional only to the extent that they were not mandatory. The recent follow-up …

Juvenile Crime And Criminal Justice: Resolving Border Disputes, Jeffrey Fagan

Faculty Scholarship

Rising juvenile crime rates during the 1970s and 1980s spurred state legislatures across the country to exclude or transfer a significant share of offenders under the age of eighteen to the jurisdiction of the criminal court, essentially redrawing the boundary between the juvenile and adult justice systems. Jeffrey Fagan examines the legal architecture of the new boundary-drawing regime and how effective it has been in reducing crime.

The juvenile court, Fagan emphasizes, has always had the power to transfer juveniles to the criminal court. Transfer decisions were made individually by judges who weighed the compet­ing interests of public safety and …