Criminal Law Commons^™

Summary Of State V. Sargent, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 18, Michael Pandullo

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court decided whether justice courts have jurisdiction to order a defendant to personally appear at a preliminary hearing when the defendant has filed a waiver of personal appearance and counsel has appeared on his behalf.

The Legality Of Governmental Responses To Terrorism And The Dichotomous Characterization Of Terrorists As Criminals Or Enemy Combatants, Gregory E. Maggs

ExpressO

This article argues that the United States and other nations ought to create specialized laws to regulate governmental responses to terrorism, rather than debating whether the current laws of war or the current rules of law enforcement should apply. These specialized laws would see terrorism as a problem that sometimes lies between traditional crime and traditional warfare, and would establish rules designed to address governmental responses to it.

Is Capital Punishment Immoral Even If It Does Deter Murder?, Thomas Kleven

ExpressO

After years of inconclusive debate, recent studies purport to demonstrate that capital punishment does indeed deter murder, perhaps to the tune of multiple saved lives for each person executed. In response to these studies, Professors Sunstein and Vermeule have argued that since capital punishment leads to a net savings of innocent lives, it may be morally required on consequentialist grounds. I argue, even assuming the validity of the studies, that capital punishment cannot be justified in the United States in the current historical context for reasons of justice that trump consequentialist considerations. Mine is not an argument that capital punishment …

Misplaced Angst---Another Look At Consent-Search Jurisprudence, Daniel R. Williams

ExpressO

Conventional scholarship misunderstands the judicial invocation of voluntariness when evaluating a purported consensual search. The key is to nail down more precisely what we mean by the term, consent. Most commentators mistakenly entwine consent and waiver, wrongly treating the act of consenting (to a search, to questioning, etc.) as an instance where the actor is waiving a constitutional right. That conceptual error promotes the view that consent refers to a subjective condition, a psychological state, which, in turn, spurs the expectation that voluntariness refers to a person's inner experience. On this view of consent, the person's inner experience is what …

Dangerousness And Expertise Redux, Christopher Slobogin

ExpressO

Civil commitment, confinement under sexual predator laws, and many capital and noncapital sentences depend upon proof of a propensity toward violence. This article discusses the current state of prediction science, in particular the advantages and disadvantages of clinical and actuarial prediction, and then analyzes how the rules of evidence should be interpreted in deciding whether opinions about propensity should be admissible. It concludes that dangerousness predictions that are not based on empirically-derived probability estimates should be excluded from the courtroom unless the defense decides otherwise. This conclusion is not bottomed on the usual concern courts and commentators raise about expert …

Necessity, Torture And Existential Politics, Christopher Kutz

ExpressO

This paper takes up the political theory sketched by the Office of Legal Counsel memorandum of August 1, 2002. That memorandum proposed a theory of executive emergency powers, including the power to use torturous interrogation techniques otherwise barred by domestic and international law. According to the memorandum, both the power to deploy torture and other forms of coercive interrogation, and the general freedom of the executive to direct policy in times of war, are grounded in a justification of necessity. The central aim of my paper is to explore the force and limits of necessity claims in moral and political …

The Suffocation Of Free Speech Under The Gravity Of Danger Of Terrorism, Tim Davis

ExpressO

On July 14, 2005, Ali al-Timimi was sentenced to life in prison plus 70 years for acts of pure speech. The United States government contended that Timimi, through his lectures and direct personal appeals, induced and/or aided and abetted local Muslim men to leave the country and pursue jihad training with the intent to defend the Taliban against all potential enemies, including the United States. Buried in nearly 200 pages of jury instructions was a single paragraph that unceremoniously described the law of protected speech under Brandenburg v. Ohio. At first blush, Brandenburg seemed to unequivocally lay down the rule …

Gender Equality, Social Values And Provocation Law In The United States, Canada And Australia, Caroline A. Forell

ExpressO

In this article I examine and compare the partial defense of provocation as it applies to domestic homicide in Australia, Canada, and the United States on both the gendered-male basis of jealous rage and gendered-female basis of fear. I explain why substantive equality, prevalent under Canadian constitutional law, has not resulted in woman-friendly provocation rules in Canada and the United States and why Australia is the leader in incorporating substantive equality into its provocation doctrine. I conclude that the main reason why some Australian jurisdictions have abolished provocation and others have female-friendly versions of the doctrine is that, unlike Canada …

Torture: Considering A Framework For Limiting Use, Scott J. Goldberg

ExpressO

Abu Graib, Guantanamo, the War on Terror—the debate over the use of torture is still very much alive in the world today. The debate can be divided into two questions: (1) whether there should be an actual absolute ban where torture is never allowed either ethically or legally, and (2) if torture should be allowed under certain circumstances what form of regulation is best able to ensure that it is used only in those most limited circumstances. Currently, there is an absolute ban in place, yet world leaders, applying a case-by-case utilitarian approach, in fact permit the use of torture …

Summary Of Redeker V. Dist. Ct., 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 14, Brandon P. Kemble

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Arie R. Redeker, facing a capital murder trial, made a petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenging the alleged aggravating circumstances that he was convicted of a felony involving the use or threat of violence to the person of another.

Cambodia At A Crossroads: How Repealing Untac Article 63, Cambodia's Current Defamation Law, Will Lead To A More Vigorous Democracy, Alicia A. Adornato

ExpressO

Cambodia’s current criminal defamation law is an impermissible intrusion of Cambodians’ constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of expression. The law itself is a remnant of the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia. Moreover it is now being used as a tool to silence the government’s political opposition through a weak judiciary system, leaving in its wake a democracy afraid to exercise its constitutionally guaranteed rights. This law is an unconstitutional violation for several reasons: first, it violates the right to freedom of expression which is guaranteed in Cambodia’s Constitution. Secondly, it is incompatible with Cambodia’s human rights obligations under the …

American Indians, Crime, And The Law, Kevin K. Washburn

Michigan Law Review

This Article evaluates the federal Indian country criminal justice regime, not against norms of Indian law and policy, but against those of criminal law and policy. Specifically, this Article evaluates the federal constitutional norms that lie at the heart of American criminal justice and that are designed to ensure the legitimacy of federal criminal trials. Toward that end, Part I presents a critical description of key facets of the federal Indian country criminal justice system. Part II begins the critical evaluation by evaluating a key institutional player in the federal system, the federal prosecutor. It highlights the handicaps faced by …

Bringing Human Rights Abusers To Justice In U.S. Courts: Carrying Forward The Legacy Of The Nuremberg Trials, Sandra Coliver

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Remarks, Eli M. Rosenbaum

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

From Nuremberg To Tokyo: Some Reflections On The Tokyo Trial (On The Sixtieth Anniversary Of The Nuremberg Trials), Zhang Wanhong

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Nuremberg Trials: A Reappraisal And Their Legacy: An Introduction, Sheri P. Rosenberg

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Transitional Justice: Postwar Legacies, Ruti Teitel

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Remarks, Richard W. Sonnenfeldt

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Essay: The Romance Of Nuremberg And The Tease Of Moral Justice, Thane Rosenbaum

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Justice Story Cuts The Gordian Knot Of Hung Jury Instructions, George C. Thomas Iii, Mark Greenbaum

Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers

Constitutional law grows more complex over time. The complexity is due, in large part, to the rule of stare decisis. When faced with precedents that it does not wish to follow, the Court usually distinguishes the case before it. Thus, the constitutional landscape is littered with cases that do not fit well together. Navigating past these shoals is often difficult for courts following the Supreme Court’s lead. One example is the law governing instructions that a trial judge can give a deadlocked jury in a criminal case. The right to a jury trial entails the right to have the jury …

Summary Of Moore V. State, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 4, Stephanie Hamrick

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appellant Moore was convicted of fraudulent use of a credit card based on an incident that took place in a Las Vegas Wal-Mart. His suspicious behavior2 while shopping attracted the attention of a loss prevention specialist. The loss prevention specialist suspected Moore might attempt to purchase goods with a credit card, and instructed a cashier to contact management if Moore presented a credit card without proper identification. Moore brought over $300 worth of goods to the cashier’s register and presented a credit card. When Moore could not produce identification, the cashier summoned a manager who took the credit card to …

Is Capital Punishment Immoral Even If It Does Deter Murder?, Thomas Kleven

ExpressO

After years of inconclusive debate, recent studies purport to demonstrate that capital punishment does indeed deter murder, perhaps to the tune of multiple saved lives for each person executed. In response to these studies, Professors Sunstein and Vermeule have argued that since capital punishment leads to a net savings of innocent lives, it may be morally required on consequentialist grounds. I argue, even assuming the validity of the studies, that capital punishment cannot be justified in the United States in the current historical context for reasons of justice that trump consequentialist considerations. Mine is not an argument that capital punishment …

The Price Of Pretrial Release: Can We Afford To Keep Our Fourth Amendment Rights?, Melanie D. Wilson

Scholarly Articles

The Fourth Amendment serves an important constitutional function. It protects the privacy of Americans from intrusions on their personal security. Few rights are held more sacred. When a person is arrested and faces the real likelihood of pretrial detention in jail, the person risks not only a reduction in his privacy rights, but also a loss of his liberty. In such circumstances, the arrested person should be able to bargain away some of his Fourth Amendment rights in exchange for the additional freedoms associated with release to home.

Undoubtedly, defendants forced to choose between incarceration and Fourth Amendment rights will …

In Booker'S Shadow: Restitution Forces A Second Debate On Honesty In Sentencing, Melanie D. Wilson

Scholarly Articles

The Supreme Court's January 2005 decision in Booker should induce Congress to enact legislation to remedy the constitutional invalidity of the MVRA and encourage the Department of Justice to revisit how restitution is charged, indicted, negotiated in plea agreements, proven at trial, and presented at sentencing hearings. The Booker decision is also a reminder to lower federal courts to adhere to the rule announced by the Supreme Court in Hughey v. United States, which limits the reach of orders of restitution. Congress, DOJ, and the federal courts should insist on candor in charging and sentencing to remedy the restitution …

Blue Mourning: Postpartum Psychosis And The Criminal Insanity Defense, Waking To The Reality Of Women Who Kill Their Children, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 515 (2006), Jessica Butterfield

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Manson V. Brathwaite: The Supreme Court's Misunderstanding Of Eyewitness Identification, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 539 (2006), Ruth Yacona

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Adjudicated On The Merits?: Why The Aedpa Requires State Courts To Exhibit Their Reasoning, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 995 (2006), Ezra Spilke

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dostoyevsky And The Therapeutic Jurisprudence Confession, 40 J. Marshall L. Rev. 41 (2006), Amy D. Ronner

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Second Chance For Justice: Reevaluation Of The United States Double Jeopardy Standard, 40 J. Marshall L. Rev. 371 (2006), Andrea Koklys

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Inconsistent Methods For The Adjudication Of Alleged Mentally Retarded Individuals: A Comparison Of Ohio's And Georgia's Post-Atkins Frameworks For Determining Mental Retardation, Scott R. Poe

Cleveland State Law Review

This Note compares Ohio's and Georgia's post-Atkins frameworks for determining mental retardation. Ohio's framework offers a fairer application of Atkins and should serve as a guide for a national legal standard for use by state trial courts to determine mental retardation. Specifically, Ohio's use of preponderance of the evidence is a more appropriate standard of proof for determining mental retardation because it better reaches the overall goal in Atkins. Allowing the judge to make the mental retardation determination protects the alleged mentally retarded defendant from potential jury bias. Because Ohio's and Georgia's definitions of mental retardation are substantially similar and …