Criminal Law Commons^™

A Hybrid Approach To The Use Of Deliberate Ignorance In Conspiracy Cases, Jessica A. Kozlov-Davis

Michigan Law Review

When hunted, the ostrich is said to run a certain distance and then thrust its head into the sand, thinking, because it cannot see, that it cannot be seen by the hunters. Legal parlance therefore refers to the "ostrich instruction," used when a defendant acts with the awareness of a high probability of the existence of an incriminating fact, but remains deliberately ignorant as to whether the fact actually exists, hoping his ignorance will maintain his innocence. The defendant is like the ostrich - he thinks that if he does not actually see the facts, even though he knows they …

Compelled Statements From Police Officers And Garrity Immunity, Steven D. Clymer

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In this Article, Professor Steven Clymer describes the problem created when police departments require officers suspected of misconduct to answer internal affairs investigators' questions or face job termination. Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Garrity v. New Jersey, courts treat such compelled statements as immunized testimony. That treatment not only renders such a statement inadmissible in a criminal prosecution of the suspect police officer, it also may require the prosecution to shoulder the daunting and sometimes insurmountable burden of demonstrating that its physical evidence, witness testimony, and strategic decisionmaking are untainted by the statement. Because police internal affairs …

Unreasonable Probability Of Error, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

In Strickland v. Washington, the Supreme Court sought to create a uniform standard to guarantee effective assistance of counsel to criminal defendants, to "ensure a fair trial," and to assure the reliability of "a just result."' Justice O'Connor's majority opinion created a two-pronged test for overturning a trial verdict: deficient performance and resulting prejudice. The Court explicitly established a difficult burden for proving deficient performance,² but set a moderate standard for prejudice as the "reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient …

Section 5: Criminal Law And Procedure, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Apprendi V. New Jersey: Should Any Factual Determination Authorizing An Increase In A Criminal Defendant's Sentence Be Proven To A Jury Beyond A Reasonable Doubt, Jason Ferguson

Mercer Law Review

In Apprendi v. New Jersey, the United States Supreme Court held, with the exception of the fact of prior criminal convictions, that any factual determination that authorizes an increased sentence beyond the statutory maximum must be proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Inherent Constitutionality Of The Police Use Of Deadly Force To Stop Dangerous Pursuits, Michael Douglas Owens

Mercer Law Review

Every day in our country, police agencies pursue criminal suspects who are unlawfully attempling to elude them. Reality-based television shows, such as Cops and the Police Videos series on the Fox Network, bring home to the public some measure of the adrenaline-producing excitement that automobile pursuits engender. Rarely, however, does one see the tragedy that often results from these pursuits. While reliable nationwide statistics on police pursuits are not available, various studies depict the rate of accidents as ranging from twenty-nine percent to seventy percent, with a rate of injury ranging from eleven percent to twenty-seven percent. Injuries and deaths …

Knockin' On Heaven's Door: Rethinking The Role Of Religion In Death Penalty Cases, Gary J. Simson, Stephen P. Garvey

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Religion has played a prominent role at various points of capital trials. In jury selection, peremptory challenges have been exercised against prospective jurors on the basis of their religion. At the sentencing phase, defendants have offered as mitigating evidence proof of their religiosity, and the prosecution has introduced evidence of the victim's religiosity. In closing argument, quotations from the Bible and other appeals to religion have long been common. During deliberations, jurors have engaged in group prayer and tried to sway one another with quotes from scripture.

Such practices have not gone unquestioned. Rather remarkably, however, the questions have almost …

A Primer On Rough Sets: A New Approach To Drawing Conclusions From Data, Zdzisław Pawlak

Cardozo Law Review

Rough set theory is a new mathematical approach to vague and uncertain data analysis. This Article explains basic concepts of the theory through a simple tutorial example and briefly outlines the application of the method to drawing conclusions from factual data. The presented approach can be used in some kind of legal reasoning.

The Newness Of New Technology, Monroe E. Price

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

True Threats: Evolving Mens Rea Requirements For Violations Of 18 U.S.C. § 875(C), Justin Myer Lichterman

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Causality And Responsibility, Glenn Shafer

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Forecasting Life And Death: Juror Race, Religion, And Attitude Toward The Death Penalty, Theodore Eisenberg, Stephen P. Garvey, Martin T. Wells

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Determining whether race, sex, or other juror characteristics influence how capital case jurors vote is difficult. Jurors tend to vote for death in more egregious cases and for life in less egregious cases no matter what their own characteristics. And a juror's personal characteristics may get lost in the process of deliberation because the final verdict reflects the jury's will, not the individual juror's. Controlling for the facts likely to influence a juror's verdict helps to isolate the influence of a juror's personal characteristics. Examining each juror's first sentencing vote reveals her own judgment before the majority works its will. …

"Whodunit" Versus "What Was Done": When To Admit Character Evidence In Criminal Cases, Sherry F. Colb

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In virtually every jurisdiction in the United States, the law of evidence prohibits parties from offering proof of an individual's general character traits to suggest that, on a specific occasion, the individual behaved in a manner consistent with those traits. In a criminal trial in particular, the law prohibits a prosecutor's introduction of evidence about the defendant's character as proof of his guilt. In this Article, Professor Colb proposes that the exclusion of defendant character evidence is appropriate in one category of cases but inappropriate in another. In the first category, which Professor Colb calls "whodunit" cases, the parties agree …

Quiet Rebellion? Explaining Nearly A Decade Of Declining Federal Drug Sentences, Frank O. Bowman Iii, Michael Heise

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This is the first of two articles, the second of which will appear in January 2002 edition of the Iowa Law Review, in which we seek an explanation for the little-noticed and hitherto unexamined fact that the average length of prison sentences imposed in federal court for narcotics violations has been declining steadily since 1991-92.

According to figures maintained by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, in the eight years between 1991 and 1999, the average federal drug sentence decreased from 95.7 months to 75.2 months, a drop of 22%, or nearly two years, per defendant. United States …

Quiet Rebellion? Explaining Nearly A Decade Of Declining Federal Drug Sentences With Michael Heise, Frank O. Bowman Iii, Michael Heise

Faculty Publications

The Article begins with an examination of three primarily empirical questions. First, is the trend real? In other words, is the apparent decrease in federal drug sentences merely a species of statistical hiccup, a random fluctuation that could move easily and rapidly in the other direction? Or is the decline in average drug sentences large enough, and the trend prolonged enough, that we can safely conclude that something meaningful is occurring?

Make Way For The Aba: Smith V. Robbins Clears A Path For Anders Alternatives, James E. Duggan, Andrew W. Moeller

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

Indigents appealing criminal convictions are entitled to court-appointed counsel. The American Bar Association suggests a standard for providing the required representation. This standard is known as the Idaho Rule.

No-Merit Briefs Undermine The Adversary Process In Criminal Appeals, Randall L. Hodgkinson

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

Appellate defense attorneys face a dilemma when faced with an appeal that has no obvious merit. No-merit briefs allow an attorney to forego an appeal when there is no apparent merit. In cases involving direct appeals from conviction, the cost of abandonment of the client far outweighs the benefits.

When Reasonable Jurists Could Disagree: The Fifth Circuit's Misapplication Of The Frivolousness Standard, Brent E. Newton

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

A criminal appeal that is deemed frivolous is summarily dismissed without further judicial consideration. The frequency of findings of frivolousness in the Fifth Circuit has caused concern among appellate practitioners and has even led to sanctions against practitioners. This article analyzes the Fifth Circuit’s frivolousness standard.

Criminal Law—Statutes Of Limitation On Sexual Assault Crimes: Has The Availability Of Dna Evidence Rendered Them Obsolete, Amy Dunn

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Chinese Population Transfer In Tibet, John S. Hall

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The note examines the impact of China's population transfer policies in Tibet since the 1950 invasion, arguing that these policies have led to the marginalization of Tibetans, significant environmental degradation, and human rights abuses. It explores various legal and diplomatic strategies to address these issues, including the Dalai Lama's Five Point Plan, human rights law, environmental law, and international negotiations.

Innocence Protection Act: Death Penalty Reform On The Horizon, Ronald Weich

All Faculty Scholarship

The criminal justice pendulum may be swinging back in the direction of fairness. The Innocence Protection Act of 2001, introduced in both the Senate and the House of Representatives earlier this year, promises meaningful reforms in the administration of capital punishment in the United States.

Unlike previous slabs at reform, the Innocence Protection Act (lPA) has a real chance to become law because it commands unusually broad bipartisan support. The Senate bill (S. 486) is sponsored by Democrat Pat Leahy of Vermont and Republican Gordon Smith of Oregon. The House bill (H.R. 912) is sponsored by Democrat Bill Delahunt of …

Disarming Canadians, And Arming Them With Tolerance: Banning Firearms And Minimum Sentences To Control Violent Crime--An Essay On An Apparent Contradiction, Helene Dumont

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

In an article published in French in 1997, the author offered reflections on feminism and criminal law that would allow for a better control of violent crime, without Parliament having to resort to excessively severe sentences. In this respect, she argued that there was no contradiction in supporting the radical ban of firearms in Canada, while opposing a minimum sentence of four years under the Firearms Act, which currently affects approximately ten serious Criminal Code offences. After setting out her position in favour of the "disarmament" of Canadians, the author argued that minimum sentences of four years were unconstitutional. Such …

Grouping Fraud And Money Laundering Under The Federal Sentencing Guidelines: The Need For Uniformity And Proportionality, Christopher J. Fernandez

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appeals In The Ad Hoc International Criminal Tribunals: Structure, Procedure, And Recent Cases, Mark A. Drumbl, Kenneth S. Gallant

Scholarly Articles

Two international criminal tribunals are developing and remaking much of international humanitarian law—the law of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. These are the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (“ICTY”)and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (“ICTR”).

For the first time, appellate practice and procedure have become vital to the development of international humanitarian law. These two ad hoc Tribunals have substantial appellate as well as trial jurisdiction. In this, they are quite different from their historic predecessors, the International Military Tribunals at Nuremberg and Tokyo following World War II, which had no appellate jurisdiction or appellate …

The Cooperation Of States With The International Criminal Court, Valerie Oosterveld

Law Publications

This Article explores the various cooperation obligations included within the Rome Statute related to arrest and surrender; investigation and evidence gathering; privileges and immunities of Court officials; witness protection; enforcement of ICC sentences, fines, and forfeiture orders; and offenses against the administration of justice. The nature of each obligation will be discussed within the context of the Rome Statute itself, its negotiation history, and a comparison of how Canada, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom have implemented their obligations to cooperate with the ICC into their domestic law, to the end of providing technical assistance to States undertaking the important task …

Convicting The Innocent Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: Some Lessons About Jury Instructions From The Sheppard Case, Lawrence Solan

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Voluntariness With A Vengeance: Miranda And A Modern Alternative, Jonathan B. Zeitlin

St. Thomas Law Review

One of the most famous opinions in American jurisprudence is that of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Miranda v. Arizona. The Court's prophylactic rule in Miranda has been followed in both state and federal courts with little derogation for over thirty years. On February 8, 1999, in Dickerson v. United States, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ignored Miranda, turning instead to 18 U.S.C. § 3501, a relatively obscure federal statute enacted in 1968 in response to the Court's decision in Miranda. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari and heard oral …

Procedural Reforms In Capital Cases Applied To Perjury, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 453 (2001), Steven Clark

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Righting Illinois' Wrongs: Suggestions For Reform And A Call For Abolition, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 469 (2001), Sharone Levy

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Something Is Rotten In The Interrogation Room: Let's Try Video Oversight, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 537 (2001), Wayne T. Westling

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.