Criminal Law Commons^™

Lawrence And Garner: The Love (Or At Least Sexual Attraction) That Finally Dared Speak Its Name, Paris R. Baldacci

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article examines the legal evolution from *Bowers v. Hardwick* to Lawrence v. Texas, highlighting how the latter marked a pivotal shift in recognizing LGBTQ+ rights by emphasizing personal autonomy and dignity. It underscores the significance of narrative strategies in shaping judicial decisions, particularly in *Lawrence*, where the plaintiffs' personal stories influenced the Court's ruling.

The Battle To Establish An Adversarial Trial System In Italy, William T. Pizzi, Mariangela Montagna

Publications

No abstract provided.

Neighborhood, Crime, And Incarceration In New York City, Jeffery Fagan, Valerie West, Jan Holland

Faculty Scholarship

Several new studies suggest that social and spatial incarceration of young males has become part of the developmental ecology of adolescence in the nation's poorest neighborhoods. This concentration began in the 1970s, and has grown steadily through the last quarter century.The story of young men such as Cesar in Random Family illustrates the pervasive effects of both direct and vicarious prison experiences for young men and women in poor neighborhoods. Studies of street life such as Random Family, Code of the Streets, and American Project show how these experiences are now internalized in the social and psychological fabric of neighborhood …

Summary Of Ebeling V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 50, Scott Whittemore

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The defendant contended that the district court erred in sentencing him on redundant convictions.

Summary Of Johnson V. State, Christina H. Wang

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, of two counts of uttering a forged instrument and one count of principal to commit uttering a forged instrument.

Summary Of Martinez V. State, Scott Whittemore

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Gina Martinez appealed a district court order denying her motion for return of money deposited as bail.

Summary Of Mcconnell V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 105, Nevada Law Journal

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appellant Robert McConnell murdered Brian Pierce in August 2002. The State of Nevada charged McConnell with first-degree murder and sought capital sentencing. The State alleged two theories: deliberate, premeditated murder and felony murder during the perpetration of a burglary. McConnell represented himself, pleaded guilty to first-degree murder, and presented a case in mitigation at his penalty hearing. The jury returned a sentence of death. Initially, McConnell moved to waive his appeal but eventually reconsidered and authorized counsel to fully brief all issues on appeal. Specifically, McConnell challenged the propriety of his penalty hearing and death sentence on various grounds. The …

Summary Of Means V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Op. 101, Justin L. Carley

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Clyde Means was charged with one count of open or gross lewdness and three counts of sexual assault upon his nineteen year old son. At trial, the jury was empaneled but the district court conducted a hearing to determine the admissibility of Means’ prior bad acts. Because the district court ruled that the acts were admissible, Means, through his attorneys, negotiated a plea bargain. Means would plead guilty to one count of sexual assault in exchange for dismissal of the other charges. Means was informed that he would face two to twenty years in prison, fines, and be required to …

Summary Of Pineda V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep 24, James Davis

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appellant appealed his jury conviction of second-degree murder in the Second Judicial District Court. Appellant raised three issues on appeal. They were: (1) Whether the defendant waived his right to appeal the court’s ruling in limine that his prior felony conviction could be used for impeachment purposes when he introduced his convictions during direct examination. (2) Whether the proper “self-defense” jury instruction was provided to the jury, over the defendants proposed, but rejected, alternative jury instructions. (3) Whether expert testimony is admissible during the penalty phase, when the prospective expert has only generalized knowledge regarding the specifics of the case.

Summary Of Rudin V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 17, Mike Feliciano

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appellant Margaret Rudin (Rudin) married her husband, Ron, in September of 1987. In January of 1995, Ron’s remains were discovered at Lake Mohave, he apparently had been murdered. Shortly after the discovery of her husband’s body, Rudin boarded a plane to St. Louis, Missouri. On April 17, 1997, Rudin was indicted by the Clark County grand jury on three counts for (1) unauthorized surreptitious intrusion of privacy by listening device, (2) murder with the use of a deadly weapon and (3) accessory to murder. A warrant was then issued for her arrest. Rudin was subsequently apprehended in Massachusetts in November …

Summary Of State V. Dist. Ct. (Romano), Christina Wang

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Real party in interest Robert Romano is charged in an indictment with four counts of sexual assault of a minor under fourteen years of age and ten counts of lewdness with a child under fourteen years of age. Romano and his girlfriend are the natural parents of the child victim, born May 5, 1997. In November 2002, the child allegedly told her mother that Romano had engaged in inappropriate activities with her. The mother contacted Nevada Child Protective Services and, at that agency’s request, took the child to Sunrise Hospital for evaluation. A pediatric emergency physician at Sunrise testified before …

Summary Of State V. Williams, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 52, Scott Whittemore

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Following her conviction for six counts of driving with prohibited substance in blood or urine, one count of use of controlled substance, and one count of possession of controlled substance, petitioner sought writ of habeas corpus.

Summary Of Vest V. State, 120 Nev. Ad. Op. 75, Amanda Yen

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This case was an appeal from a judgment of conviction, entered pursuant to a jury verdict of one count of burglary, one count of obtaining and using personal identification information of another, one count of fraudulent use of a credit or debit card, and eight counts of possession of a credit card without the cardholder’s consent.

Summary Of Zabeti V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 60, Z. Ryan Pahnke

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

After the Eighth Judicial District Court denied defendant’s motion to suppress evidence, he was convicted on a jury’s verdict of possession of a controlled substance. Defendant appealed.

On Aristotelian Criminal Law: A Reply To Duff, Kyron J. Huigens

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Future Of American Sentencing: A National Roundtable On Blakely, Ronald J. Allen, Albert Alschuler, Douglas A. Berman, Stephanos Bibas, Frank O. Bowman Iii, Daniel P. Blank, Charles R. Breyer, Steven Chanenson, Michael R. Dreeben, Margareth Etienne, Jeffrey L. Fisher, Patrick Keenan, Joseph E. Kennedy, Nancy J. King, Susan J. Klein, Rory K. Little, Marc L. Miller, J. Bradley O'Connell, David Porter, Kevin R. Reitz, Daniel C. Richman, Kate Stith, Barbara Tombs, Richard B. Walker, Robert Weisberg, Robert F. Wright Jr., Jonathan Wroblewski, David N. Yellen

Faculty Scholarship

In the wake of the dramatic Supreme Court decision in Blakely v. Washington, Stanford Law School convened an assembly of the most eminent academic and professional sentencing experts in the country to jointly assess the meaning of the decision and its implications for federal and state sentencing reform. The event took place on October 8 and 9, just a few months after Blakely came down and the very week that the Supreme Court heard the arguments in United States v. Booker and United States v. Fanfan, the cases that will test Blakely's application to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Thus the …

Aedpa's "Adjudication On The Merits" Requirement: Collateral Review, Federalism, And Comity, Robert D. Sloane

Faculty Scholarship

The modern law of federal habeas corpus is a labyrinth of counterfactuals and arcane procedural hurdles that few state petitioners manage to navigate-as Justice Blackmun once wrote less charitably in dissent, "a Byzantine morass of arbitrary, unnecessary, and unjustifiable impediments to the vindication of federal rights." The convoluted inquiries required arise from the need to reconcile three developments of the past four decades that remain in tension with one another: first, the Warren Court's expansion of federal habeas relief, identified with Fay v. Noia and its progeny; second, the Burger and Rehnquist Courts' curtailment of that expansion, identified with Wainwright …

Summary Of State V. Bennett, 119 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 63, Shane Jasmine Young

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal and cross-appeal from a district court order granting in part and denying in part Defendant’s post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus in a capital case.

Summary Of Smith V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Op. 96, Sally L. Galati

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Defendant appealed from a judgment of conviction for one count of burglary following a jury verdict. Defendant’s primary contention was that the district court erred in refusing his proffered jury instruction on the lesser crime of trespass.

Ethical Issues In Defending A Terrorism Case: Stuck In The Middle, Joshua L. Dratel

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article discusses the ethical and legal challenges faced by criminal defense attorneys in terrorism cases, particularly focusing on the impact of Special Administrative Measures (SAMs), the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA). These measures create significant barriers to effective legal representation, undermining the constitutional rights of defendants and the attorney-client relationship. The author argues that these practices not only impair the defense in terrorism cases but also risk encroaching on civil liberties in ordinary criminal cases.

Ethical Issues In Defending A Terrorism Case: How Secrecy And Security Impair The Defense Of A Terrorism Case, Joshua L. Dratel

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article discusses the unique ethical and legal challenges faced by criminal defense attorneys in terrorism cases, particularly highlighting the impact of Special Administrative Measures (SAMs), the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA). These laws and regulations, expanded post-September 11, 2001, create significant barriers to effective representation, undermining the attorney-client relationship and constitutional protections. The article emphasizes how these measures not only complicate terrorism cases but also risk bleeding into other areas of criminal law, eroding civil liberties more broadly.

Criminal Law And Criminal Procedure, John O. Cole, Bonnie K. Cole

Mercer Law Review

In reading over 900 cases in criminal law and criminal procedure during the survey period, the fact that courts find the time to carefully analyze the allegations of error in each case is striking. The difference in the quality of the courts' work is especially striking when compared to the courts of twenty years ago.

Several themes emerge after reading these cases. The first theme is the number of specious arguments raised on appeal. This is due, in large part, to the Georgia Supreme Court's opinion in Huguley v. State in which the court disapproved Anders motions and forced attorneys …

Death Penalty Law, Michael Mears, Holly Geerdes

Mercer Law Review

This Article surveys the death penalty decisions of the Georgia Supreme Court from June 1, 2002 through May 31, 2003.' The cases discussed include those heard by the supreme court on interim appeal, on direct appeal, and on review of habeas corpus decisions. Focusing on the court's decisions that affect the trial and appeal of death penalty cases, this Article, with some exceptions, does not discuss holdings in capital cases that are common to all criminal appeals. Four recent decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States are included

Criminal Statutes Of Limitations: An Obstacle To The Prosecution And Punishment Of Child Sexual Abuse, Jodi Leibowitz

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Rights Plaintiffs And John Doe Defendants: A Study In Section 1983 Procedure, Howard M. Wasserman

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Delusions Of Grand Juries, Niki Kuckes

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law, Marla Graff Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Booze, Drugs, And Rock & Roll: Crime During The College Years, Paul S. Gutman

ExpressO

In this Article, the author examines the predilection of college and university students towards certain types of illegal behaviors. Specifically, the Article considers the widespread instances of drug use, under-age alcohol use, and "file-sharing" using Napster and its progeny. The Article's main focus is on why such illegal behaviors are rampant among college students who might otherwise be

Conference Program

Hofstra Law Review Symposia

No abstract provided.

Indianapolis V. Edmond And The Original Understanding Of The Fourth Amendment, Bruce Newman

ExpressO

In this article I examine to what extent Indianapolis v. Edmond is in keeping with the original understanding of the Fourth Amendment. I conclude that the Founders were much more concerned with searches of real property, often insisting, not only on suspicion, but also a on warrant when searches of real property are involved. Secondly, while the Founders did not consider warrants necessary for searches and seizures off of real property (which for the sake of simplicity I call searches in public areas) the evidence suggests suspicion was required. Indeed, the Fourth Amendment was a direct response to the British …