Criminal Law Commons^™

The Long Arm And The Short Stick: How Citizenship Transforms White-Collar Enforcement, Andrey Spektor, Henry B. Blaikie

Fordham Law Review Online

Transnational white-collar enforcement has expanded steadily, even amid recent Department of Justice rhetoric favoring restraint. Yet the enforcement apparatus imposes markedly different—and more costly—consequences on noncitizen defendants than on similarly situated U.S. citizens. Noncitizens are more likely to be detained pretrial and more likely to serve longer and harsher custodial terms because they are excluded from sentence-reducing mechanisms, housed in more restrictive facilities, and face an additional layer of postsentence immigration detention. These structural features convert nominally equivalent sentences into more punitive sanctions while increasing burdens on courts, prisons, the immigration system, and taxpayers.

This Essay argues that courts, as …

Minimal Success: The Consequences Of Mandatory Minimums In Youth Sentencing, Maya Chrobot

Fordham Law Review

In New York State, children as young as thirteen can be processed as adults and sentenced to mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory minimum sentences require judges to sentence the defendant to a statutorily set minimum term of imprisonment. Practitioners, judges, and researchers question the efficacy of mandatory minimum sentences, finding that they are ineffective at deterring crime, decreasing bias in sentencing, and increasing community safety. Additionally, there is clear evidence about the damaging effects of incarceration on young adults. Instead of functioning as rehabilitative punishment, incarceration leads young adults to experience poor mental and physical health outcomes upon release, and they …

Lessons Learned From Global Responses To Criminal Abortion Laws, Cynthia Soohoo

Fordham Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

Collar Correction For Lenity: Modifying The Rule Of Lenity To Promote More Equitable Application To White-Collar And Blue-Collar Defendants, Brennan Corriston

Fordham Law Review Online

Centuries ago in England, when most crimes were punishable by death, judges—aware of the unfairness of this system—construed penal statutes narrowly. This was “to stem the march to the gallows” and to protect citizens from this overly harsh regime. From these harsh origins arose the rule of lenity, which instructs that when the scope of a criminal statute is ambiguous, courts should select the less harsh—i.e., more lenient—interpretation of the statute. This principle can serve constitutional functions: lenity safeguards due process by ensuring that the public has fair notice about the reach of criminal laws, and it safeguards separation of …

Taking The Profit Out Of War: Why International Law Requires Restitution Of Nazi-Looted Art, Raymond J. Dowd

Fordham Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

Recalibrating Deference In Sentencing, Meghana Nemali

Fordham Law Review

The U.S. Sentencing Commission (the “Commission”) is responsible for promoting consistency, transparency, and fairness in federal sentencing. In pursuit of this mandate, the Commission publishes the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines (the “Guidelines”), which are accompanied by official commentary. In Stinson v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court endowed the commentary with controlling authority. However, nearly three decades later, the Court in Kisor v. Wilkie granted courts greater discretion in deciding whether to defer to the commentary. Moreover, in 2024, the Court eliminated the absolute deference regime for administrative agency determinations in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. As a result, …

Red, White-, And Blue-Collar Crime: Federal Sentencing Practices Among White-Collar And Blue-Collar Offenders, Henna Judge

Fordham Law Review

Under the current federal sentencing regime, district courts exercise immense amounts of discretion when sentencing. Though strict adherence to the U.S. Sentencing Commission Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) was once mandatory, courts must now use these Guidelines as an advisory starting point and make a series of fact-specific determinations when sentencing a defendant. Though judicial discretion in this realm aids in preventing undue reliance on Guidelines-range recommendations that can lack nuance, it also invites bias.

In recent years, scholars and courts alike have called attention to a potential disparity in the way blue-collar and white-collar offenders are sentenced. This Note examines relevant …

Equality In Sentencing Mitigation, John B. Meixner Jr.

Fordham Law Review

As guilty-plea rates have skyrocketed, sentencing has become an increasingly important part of criminal procedure. With judges often wielding significant discretion at sentencing, a key question is how judges interpret mitigation: evidence about the defendant’s background or the case that supports a reduced sentence. Past empirical research—both experimental and in real-world cases—indicates that mitigation plays an important role in determining sentences. But does mitigation help everyone, or does it reinforce inequalities that frequently infect other areas of criminal procedure? Do low-income Black defendants with appointed counsel benefit from sentencing mitigation as much as wealthier White defendants with private attorneys? Do …

Settling On A Standard: Reviewing The Right To Self-Representation, Lauren Lipson

Fordham Law Review

Courts appoint counsel for indigent criminal defendants who cannot afford legal representation to uphold their Sixth Amendment rights. In its seminal waiver case, Faretta v. California, the U.S. Supreme Court elevated the corollary right—the right to self-representation—to constitutional status. In dicta, the Court created a standard by which defendants must waive their right to counsel “knowingly and intelligently” to proceed pro se. The Court subsequently sculpted the right to self-representation as it came to standby counsel and mental competency, but it never prescribed a precise waiver colloquy for district court judges to administer, causing the Faretta colloquy to look …

Recalibrating Risk Under Dobbs, Yvonne Lindgren, Michelle Oberman

Fordham Law Review

In response to mounting evidence of the devastating harms patients have experienced under abortion bans, abortion opponents and the Supreme Court of Texas have argued that the bans are clear but that doctors are willfully refusing to provide care. Instead of reforming the bans, they argue that doctors should be sued in medical malpractice for their failure to meet the standard of care. This Article interrogates that claim, investigating whether the crisis in reproductive healthcare that has resulted from delayed and denied care can be remedied by suing doctors. Specifically, can medical malpractice litigation provide guardrails against the erosion in …

Remarks, The Honorable Michael Mukasey

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Cultural Property Protection As A National Security Enforcement Priority, Andrew C. Adams

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Presumption Against Extraterritoriality And Wire Fraud, L. Jackson Howell Jr.

Fordham Law Review

As globalization and technology increasingly blur geographic boundaries, federal prosecutors have turned to the wire fraud statute as a powerful tool for targeting transnational misconduct. Despite its popularity in international fraud prosecution, the statute’s application to foreign conduct continues to raise unresolved and pressing questions under the presumption against extraterritoriality. Specifically, courts have struggled to identify when a domestic wire communication is sufficient to bring a largely foreign fraudulent scheme within the reach of U.S. law. With the U.S. Supreme Court silent on the wire fraud statute directly, and zigzagging in its extraterritoriality jurisprudence more generally, lower courts are split …

Abortion Travel Restrictions Under The Dormant Commerce Clause After National Pork Producers Council V. Ross, Katherine Bartley

Fordham Law Review

Since Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, twelve states have banned abortion entirely, and seven states have banned abortion earlier in pregnancy than the standard set in Roe v. Wade. As abortion access dwindles, patients increasingly cross state lines to seek reproductive healthcare. In response, antiabortion state officials and lawmakers have made efforts to restrict interstate travel for abortion care.

This Note examines abortion travel restrictions under the “Dormant” Commerce Clause doctrine, which limits state laws that burden interstate commerce. In 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed but narrowed the judge-made doctrine in National Pork Producers Council v. …

When Prenatal Care Becomes A Crime, Casey Hunter

Fordham Law Review

For decades, pregnant women have increasingly faced criminalization for their actions and conduct during pregnancy, with Alabama emerging as a focal point due to its aggressive use of section 26-15-3.2: Chemical Endangerment of Exposing a Child to an Environment in Which Controlled Substances Are Produced or Distributed. Originally intended to protect children from the dangers of methamphetamine labs, this law has been reinterpreted to prosecute pregnant women who test positive for controlled substances. Central to these prosecutions are positive drug tests obtained from prenatal health records, causing many women to avoid prenatal care for fear of legal consequences.

This Note …

“The Gun’S Not Mine!”: The Admissibility Of Defendants’ Exculpatory Hearsay Statements Under Federal Rules Of Evidence 803(2) & (3), Faustino S. Galante

Fordham Law Review Online

Exculpatory hearsay statements made by criminal defendants often warrant admission under the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) as excited utterances, under Rule 803(2), or as statements reflecting a then-existing state of mind, under Rule 803(3). Nevertheless, defendants often struggle to have their exculpatory statements admitted pursuant to these rules—even when those statements fulfill their categorical requirements.

This Comment surveys the different approaches courts take to determine whether exculpatory hearsay statements made by criminal defendants are admissible under Rules 803(2) and (3). It argues that courts too often misapply these rules to exclude defendants’ exculpatory statements. In particular, courts counteract the …

Doing Justice With Empathy: Black Prosecutors In The Age Of Mass Incarceration, Kevin Woodson

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Properly Partitioning Prejudice: Analyzing Mixed Brady And Napue Claims, Patrick Scariano

Fordham Law Review

Due process affords criminal defendants the right to receive evidence possessed by the government that would aid in their defense. This right was codified in Brady v. Maryland. Brady’s lesser-known ancestor is Napue v. Illinois, which gave defendants the right to a new trial if the government knowingly offered perjured testimony in their original trial. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that these rights are critical to support verdicts worthy of confidence necessary to ensure due process.

Unfortunately, defendants victimized by misconduct are often affected by multiple violations of their rights. Courts have developed ways to examine …

The Shadow Defendants, Mariam A. Hinds

Faculty Scholarship

Although the overrepresentation of men, specifically Black men and men of color, in the criminal legal system is well documented, the people who support these men, especially women, have garnered less attention. Women who are proximate to system-involved men—mothers, grandmothers, sisters, daughters, girlfriends, and wives—are invisible actors in the criminal legal system who perform critical tasks and provide essential support. They appear in court to demonstrate a person’s family and community ties, use their assets as collateral for bail, deposit money in commissary accounts, maintain social ties during imprisonment through letters and visits, and bear the burden of filling the …

The Violence Of Bright Lines, Terrell Woolfolk, Kathryn E. Miller

Fordham Law Review

The U.S. Supreme Court interprets the Eighth Amendment to prohibit members of certain groups from serving extreme punishments, such as the death penalty and life without parole. For example, the Court has long banned death sentences for people with intellectual disability and for those who were under eighteen years old at the time of their crime. More recently, in Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama, the Court extended this reasoning to sentences of life without parole for those under eighteen—prohibiting the sentence altogether for nonhomicide crimes and barring its mandatory imposition for homicides.

Many scholars and advocates have …

Distorted Narratives In The Treatment Program Complex, Evelyn Lia Malavé

Fordham Law Review

Problem-solving courts and alternatives to incarceration have been both celebrated as successful attempts to address the factors that lead to defendants’ involvement in the criminal legal system and critiqued as ineffective reforms that worsen mass incarceration. Specifically, critiques of the “treatment program complex” have tended to focus on how it harms defendants by exposing them to higher levels of incarceration if they fail to complete court mandates. But these critiques have failed to account for another way the treatment program complex harms defendants: by suppressing their voices regarding what kind of help they need and how they are affected by …

A Broken Shield: Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel Claims In Cases Of Racist Defense Attorneys, Sophia Sabet

Fordham Law Review

Defense attorneys are not immune to racism, and a defense attorney who holds racist beliefs about their client’s race fundamentally calls into question the representation received. Under the Sixth Amendment, all criminal defendants have the right to the effective assistance of counsel. To prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Strickland v. Washington that a criminal defendant must prove that their counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficiency prejudiced the defense. The Supreme Court supplemented the Strickland standard in Cuyler v. Sullivan and United States v. Cronic, holding that a conflict …

Will Bruen Kill Cops?, Peter N. Salib, Guha Krishnamurthi

Fordham Law Review Online

Criminal procedure is a balancing act. On one hand, it must allow law enforcement officers to protect the public and themselves. On the other hand, criminal procedure must safeguard citizens’ individual constitutional rights—privacy, physical liberty, and bodily integrity. And now, the right to bear arms.

There is a serious tension here. Landmark Fourth Amendment cases like Terry v. Ohio, Pennsylvania v. Mimms, and Chimel v. California give the police wide latitude to seize firearms on the assumption that guns are dangerous. But these doctrines largely evolved before the Second Amendment’s ascendance. In District of Columbia v. Heller, …

Article Iii Standing In Federal Prosecutions Of “Victimless Crimes”, Ryan H. Nelson

Fordham Law Review Online

Plaintiffs in federal court bear the burden of proving their standing, as Article III permits inferior federal courts, after Congressional authorization, to exercise jurisdiction over “Cases” and “Controversies” alone. From these constitutional terms of art—“Cases” and “Controversies”—we derive the familiar case-or-controversy requirement of standing, including injury. These terms of art authorize Congress to empower the inferior federal courts to hear civil and criminal actions alike, but federal prosecutors have never been similarly burdened with proving the standing of the United States in federal court, including that the United States has suffered injury. This Essay examines that lapse and contends that …

Branding Corporate Criminals, W. Robert Thomas, Milhailis E. Diamantis

Fordham Law Review

Corporate punishment has a branding problem. Criminal sanctions should call out wrongdoing and condemn wrongdoers. In a world where generic corporate misconduct is a daily affair, conviction singles out truly contemptible practices from merely sharp, unproductive, or undesirable ones. In this way, criminal law gives victims the recognition they deserve, deters future wrongdoers who want to preserve their good name, and publicly reinforces society’s most treasured values.

Unfortunately, corporate punishment falls far short of all these communicative ambitions. For punishment to convey its intended message, society must be able to hear about it. When courts convict individuals, everyone understands that …

An Apt Analogy?: Rethinking The Role Of Judicial Deference To The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Post-Kisor, Amy Walker

Fordham Law Review

Since its inception in 1984, the U.S. Sentencing Commission (the “Commission”) has struggled to garner and maintain a sense of legitimacy among federal judges. The tension is both a story about competing expertise between judges and the Commission and competing values, namely uniformity and individuality. In 1993, the U.S. Supreme Court in Stinson v. United States prioritized uniformity by telling lower courts to treat the Commission as they would any other administrative agency. Lower courts—for the most part—faithfully executed this directive until 2019, when the Supreme Court in Kisor v. Wilkie gave them another option, one that seemed to leave …

Symposium On Scholars’ Suggestions For Amendments, And Issues Raised By Artificial Intelligence

Fordham Law Review

CHAIR SCHILTZ: As those of you who have been in the rules work for a while know, rules work is cyclical. During the time I’ve been Chair of the Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules, we’ve had two packages of amendments that have gone through. The first package will take effect on December 1, 2024, and that’s the package that is led by the amendment to Rule 702 on expert testimony. And then we have another package that was just approved by the Judicial Conference and sent to the U.S. Supreme Court, and that package is led by the new rule …

Deepfakes Reach The Advisory Committee On Evidence Rules, Daniel J. Capra

Fordham Law Review

A number of articles have been written in the last couple of years about the evidentiary challenges posed by “deepfakes”—inauthentic videos and audios generated by artificial intelligence (AI) in such a way as to appear to be genuine. You are probably aware of some of the widely distributed examples, such as: (1) Pope Francis wearing a Balenciaga jacket; (2) Jordan Peele’s video showing President Barack Obama speaking and saying things that President Obama never said; (3) Nancy Pelosi speaking while appearing to be intoxicated; and (4) Robert DeNiro’s de-aging in The Irishman.

The evidentiary risk posed by deepfakes is …

Criminal Subsidiaries, Andrew K. Jennings

Fordham Law Review

Corporate groups comprise parent companies and one or more subsidiaries, which parents use to manage liabilities, transactions, operations, and regulation. Those subsidiaries can also be used to manage criminal accountability when multiple entities within a corporate group share responsibility for a common offense. A parent, for instance, might reach a settlement with prosecutors that requires its subsidiary to plead guilty to a crime, without conviction of the parent itself—a subsidiary-only conviction (SOC). The parent will thus avoid bearing collateral consequences—such as contracting or industry bars—that would follow its own conviction. For the prosecutor, such settlements can respond to criminal law’s …

Long-Range Analogizing After Bruen: How To Resolve The Circuit Split On The Federal Felon-In-Possession Ban, Sean Phillips

Fordham Law Review

In 2023, over the course of one week, two U.S. courts of appeals ruled on Second Amendment challenges to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), the federal statute prohibiting firearm possession for those convicted of felonies. Both courts applied the U.S. Supreme Court’s “history and tradition” test from New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen. In the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, criminal defendant Edell Jackson did not succeed. There, the court found that the nation’s history and tradition supported the validity of a law banning firearm possession by felons, regardless of the details of their …