Criminal Law Commons^™

A Defense Of The Integrationist Test As A Replacement For The Special Defense Of Insanity, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This article, written for a symposium on "Criminal Law and the Excuses," defends the "Integrationist" approach to analysis of the exculpatory effect of mental disability that I developed in Chapter Two of my book, Minding Justice: Laws that Deprive People with Mental Disability of Life and Liberty. The book argues that the special nature of the insanity defense should be reconsidered now that modern criminal law, in particular the Model Penal Code, has subjectivized affirmative defenses such as self-defense and duress for people who are not mentally ill. More specifically, the claim is that these latter defenses capture the universe …

The Death Penalty In Florida, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This article summarizes the findings and recommendations of the ABA Death Penalty Moratorium Implementation Project's Florida Assessment Team, which I chaired. Relying on an analysis of caselaw, studies, news reports, and interviews, the article describes significant flaws in Florida's death penalty law and practice in nine areas: the police investigative process; the analysis of scientific evidence; the conduct of prosecutors; the qualifications, reimbursement and competence of defense attorneys; the decision-making process of judges; the structure and decision-making process of capital sentencing juries; clemency; the system's reaction to the race of the victim; and the treatment of people with mental disability. …

How The Courts Opened The Door To Impeaching Criminal Defendants With Prior Convictions, Jeffrey Bellin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This Article spotlights the flawed analytical framework at the heart of the federal courts' approach to one of the most controversial trial practices in American criminal jurisprudence - the admission of prior convictions to impeach the credibility of defendants who testify. As the Article explains, the flawed approach is a byproduct of the courts' reliance on a five-factor analytical framework to implement the governing legal standard enacted by Congress in Federal Rule of Evidence 609. Tracing the evolution of the five-factor framework from its roots in pre-Rule 609 case law, the Article demonstrates that the courts' reinterpretation of the framework …

Improving The Reliability Of Criminal Trials Through Rules That Encourage Defendants To Testify, Jeffrey Bellin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Reflecting a traditional bias against defendants' trial testimony, the modern American criminal justice system, which now recognizes a constitutional right to testify at trial, unabashedly encourages defendants to waive that right and remain silent. As a result, a large percentage of criminal defendants decline to testify, forcing juries to decide the question of the defendant's guilt without ever hearing from the person most knowledgeable on the subject. This Article contends that the inflated percentage of silent defendants in the American criminal trial system is a needless, self-inflected wound, neither required by the Constitution nor beneficial to the search for truth. …

Small Claim Mass Fraud Actions: A Proposal For Aggregate Litigation Under Rico, Leah Bressack

Vanderbilt Law Review

Assume that, tomorrow, a large company advertises a "miracle pill" that it claims will cure all forms of cancer. The company uses a sophisticated national marketing campaign to convey a strong health assurance message, which it tailors to specific audiences: women with breast cancer, men with prostate cancer, older adults with intestinal cancer, and children with leukemia. In response to the national campaign, consumers across the country purchase the pill, which costs $10. Only then do consumers discover that the pill is worthless and that the company intentionally defrauded them.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations ("RICO") statute provides a …

Fantasy Crime: The Role Of Criminal Law In Virtual Worlds, Susan W. Brenner

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

This Article analyzes activity in virtual worlds that would constitute crime if they were committed in the real world. It reviews the evolution of virtual worlds like Second Life and notes research which indicates that more and more of our lives will move into this realm. The Article then analyzes the criminalization of virtual conduct that inflicts "harm" in the real world and virtual conduct that only inflicts "harm" in the virtual world. It explains that the first category qualifies as cybercrime and can be prosecuted under existing law. Finally, it analyzes the necessity and propriety of criminalizing the second …

Testing Japan's Convictions: The Lay Judge System And The Rights Of Criminal Defendants, Arne F. Soldwedel

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Japan has endured considerable international and domestic criticism over the way its criminal justice system treats criminal defendants. The system shows little regard for defendants' constitutional rights, and media reports about forced confessions and wrongful convictions are creating grassroots pressures to uphold the right to counsel, the right to silence, and the presumption of innocence.

Japan has begun to reform its legal system in order to increase public participation in government, and to create more public trust in the justice system. To achieve these aims, Japan will reintroduce jury trials in May of 2009. However, current Japanese justice reforms ignore …

Experts, Mental States, And Acts, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This article, written for a symposium on "Guilt v. Guiltiness: Are the Right Rules for Trying Factual Innocence Inevitably the Wrong Rules for Trying Culpability?," argues that the definition of expertise in the criminal justice system, derived in the federal courts and in most states from Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Co., should vary depending on whether the issue involved is past mental state or past conduct. While expert psychological testimony about past acts ought to be based on scientifically verifiable assertions, expert psychological testimony about subjective mental states relevant to criminal responsibility need not meet the same threshold. This …

Habeas Corpus And State Sentencing Reform: A Story Of Unintended Consequences, Nancy J. King, Suzanna Sherry

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This Article tells the story of how fundamental shifts in state sentencing policy collided with fundamental shifts in federal habeas policy to produce a tangled and costly doctrinal wreck. The conventional assumption is that state prisoners seeking habeas relief allege constitutional errors in their state court convictions and sentences. But almost 20 percent of federal habeas petitions filed by noncapital state prisoners do not challenge state court judgments. They instead attack administrative actions by state prison officials or parole boards, actions taken long after the petitioner's conviction and sentencing. Challenges to these administrative decisions create serious problems for federal habeas …

Offender Profiling And Expert Testimony: Scientifically Valid Or Glorified Results?, James A. George

Vanderbilt Law Review

A hallmark of Sherlock Holmes is his ability to solve complex crimes with well-staged performances. His flair for the shrewd and dramatic apprehension of a suspect in an inscrutable case often left his loyal companion Watson in awe, the local police investigators mystified, and the perpetrator thwarted. Holmes's admirers speculated that he must have had a special gift, maybe even psychic powers, which allowed him to solve any case. In reality, as Holmes always explained to his slow-witted companions, it was his insightful, rational, and logical approach to solving the mystery that inexorably led him to the solution.

Depictions of …

The Origins Of Shared Intuitions Of Justice, Owen D. Jones, Paul H. Robinson, Robert Kurzban

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Contrary to the common wisdom among criminal law scholars, empirical evidence reveals that people's intuitions of justice are often specific, nuanced, and widely shared. Indeed, with regard to the core harms and evils to which criminal law addresses itself-physical aggression, takings without consent, and deception in transactions-the shared intuitions are stunningly consistent across cultures as well as demographics. It is puzzling that judgments of moral blameworthiness, which seem so complex and subjective, reflect such a remarkable consensus. What could explain this striking result?

The authors theorize that one explanation may be an evolved predisposition toward these shared intuitions of justice, …

Law, Responsibility, And The Brain, Owen D. Jones, Dean Mobbs, Hakwan C. Lau, Christopher D. Frith

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This article addresses new developments in neuroscience, and their implications for law. It explores, for example, the relationships between brain injury and violence, as well as the connections between mental disorders and criminal behaviors. It discusses a variety of issues surrounding brain fingerprinting, the use of brain scans for lie detection, and concerns about free will. It considers the possible uses for, and legal implications of, brain-imaging technology. And it also identifies six essential limits on the use of brain imaging in courtroom procedures.

Cunningham V. California - Case Comment, Rebecca Haw Allensworth

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Sixth Amendment--Allocation of Fact-finding in Sentencing.--Apprendi v. New Jersey spawned a series of Supreme Court sentencing decisions which, when viewed together, are at best confusing and at worst contradictory. Commentators and courts have struggled to find a coherent governing principle uniting "Apprendi," "Blakely v. Washington," and "United States v. Booker." The holding in "Apprendi," originally described as a bright-line rule, has proved anything but. Last Term, in "Cunningham v. California," the Court added another chapter to the Apprendi saga when it declared unconstitutional California's Determinate Sentencing Law (DSL). Justice Ginsburg authored the majority opinion that overturned the California Supreme Court's …

The Perils Of Evidentiary Manipulation, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The use of evidentiary rules to achieve substantive goals strikes me as a Faustian bargain, and, given Bierschbach and Stein's acknowledgedly tentative position, I hope to dissuade them of the virtues of the practice. My goal therefore is to explore briefly the potential dark side of specialized evidentiary rules. The concerns of injecting substantive goals into evidence law extend far beyond the narrow legitimacy concerns Bierschbach and Stein raise. It is not simply the question of whether we aspire to a pluralistic or majority-take-all democratic society. Rather, evidentiary manipulation threatens the legitimacy of criminal and evidence law... Bierschbach and Stein's …

Regulating Settlement: What Is Left Of The Rule Of Law In The Criminal Process?, Nancy J. King

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Consider what plea bargains would be like if legal rules were taken more seriously than they currently are. A court would recognize a defendant's willingness to be convicted of an offense only when certain conditions were met: (1) the defendant actually committed the crime; (2) the defendant was punished with the penalty authorized by law for that crime; (3) all government actors involved in the investigation, prosecution, defense, and adjudication of the case had complied with the law governing the criminal process; and (4) the settlement agreement did not relieve any of them of the duty to comply with the …

"Eggshell" Victims, Private Precautions, And The Societal Benefits Of Shifting Crime, Robert A. Mikos

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Individuals spend billions of dollars every year on precautions to protect themselves from crime. Yet the legal academy has criticized many private precautions because they merely shift crime onto other, less guarded citizens, rather than reduce crime. The conventional wisdom likens such precaution-taking to rent-seeking: citizens spend resources to shift crime losses onto other victims, without reducing the size of those losses to society. The result is an unambiguous reduction in social welfare. This Article argues that the conventional wisdom is flawed because it overlooks how the law systematically understates the harms suffered by some victims of crime, first, by …

Emotional Competence, "Rational Understanding," And The Criminal Defendant, Terry A. Maroney

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Adjudicative competence, more commonly referred to as competence to stand trial, is a highly under-theorized area of law. Though it is well established that, to be competent, a criminal defendant must have a "rational" as well as 'factual" understanding of her situation, the meaning of such "rational understanding" has gone largely undefined. Given the large number of criminal prosecutions in which competence is at issue, the doctrine's instability stands in stark contrast to its importance. This Article argues that adjudicative competence, properly understood, asks whether a criminal defendant has capacity to participate meaningfully in the host of decisions potentially required …

Reasonable Suspicion And Mere Hunches, Craig S. Lerner

Vanderbilt Law Review

In Terry v. Ohio, Earl Warren held that police officers could temporarily detain a suspect, provided that they relied upon "specific, reasonable inferences," and not simply upon an "inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or 'hunch."' Since Terry, courts have strained to distinguish "reasonable suspicion," which is said to arise from the cool analysis of objective and particularized facts, from "mere hunches," which are said to be subjective, generalized, unreasoned and therefore unreliable. Yet this dichotomy between facts and intuitions is built on sand. Emotions and intuitions are not obstacles to reason, but indispensable heuristic devices that allow people to process diffuse, …

The Impact Of Joinder And Severance On Federal Criminal Cases: An Empirical Study, Andrew D. Leipold, Hossein A. Abbasi

Vanderbilt Law Review

Dave is in trouble. It was bad enough to be arrested for bank robbery; now he has learned that the prosecutor plans to join the current charge with three other, unrelated bank robberies and present all four counts in a single trial. To his priest and to his lawyer, Dave admits that he committed the first and the second robberies, but he did not commit the third or fourth. Dave is smart enough to realize, however, that once the jury starts hearing evidence of some of the crimes-all of which will sound quite similar-his ability to cast doubt on the …

Criminal Defamation And The Evolution Of The Doctrine Of Freedom Of Expression In International Law, Jo M. Pasqualucci

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Restrictions on freedom of expression may take direct and indirect forms. A state may censor speech, criminalize defamation, harass the media or individual journalists, fail to investigate crimes against the media , require the compulsory licensing of journalists, or fail to enact freedom of information laws or laws that prohibit monopoly ownership of the media. A victim of a restriction on freedom of expression that violates international law may have no recourse in domestic courts, either because state law offers no remedy or because judges are too intimidated to enforce the laws as written. In such instances, victims need recourse …

Criminalizing Marital Rape: A Comparison Of Judicial And Legislative Approaches, Theresa Fus

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Even though many countries still permit husbands to rape their wives with little or no consequence, there is a growing trend that marital exemption is unjust and has no place in a civilized society. Recognition of the inappropriateness of marital exemption is, however, only the first step towards its elimination. To effectively equalize treatment of marital and non-marital rape, legislatures and judiciaries must take action. Several countries have already been host to the abolition of marital immunity, but their approaches may not be the most effective. This Note examines the experiences of England and Canada as examples of judicial and …

Who's Afraid Of The Big Bad Wolf? The International Criminal Court As A Weapon Of Asymmetric Warfare, W. C. Austin

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The United States is engaged in a war on terror against enemies who wage "asymmetric war" through terrorism, media manipulation, and "law-fare"---exploiting judicial processes to achieve political or military objectives.

This Article explores whether the fledgling International Criminal Court (ICC) could eventually be exploited by these groups as a tool of asymmetric "law-fare." It briefly traces the history of the ICC and recounts why the United States opposes the Court. Examining the methods of asymmetric war, the Authors then explore whether the ICC could be exploited by future asymmetric warriors.

The Authors describe three asymmetric methods that could be used …

Behavioral Genetics And Crime, In Context, Owen D. Jones

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This Article provides an introduction to some of the key issues at the intersection of behavioral genetics and crime.

It provides, among other things, an overview of the emerging points of consensus, scientifically, on what behavioral genetics can and cannot tell us about criminal behavior. It also discusses a variety of important implications (as well as complexities) of attempting to use insights of behavioral genetics in legal contexts.

Structural Laws And The Puzzle Of Regulating Behavior, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This Article offers a new way of thinking about over criminalization. It argues that in regulating behavior, legislatures have relied excessively on statutory prohibitions and ex post enforcement by police and prosecutors. Regulation by "fiat" alone is often inadequate; proscriptive laws need accompanying structural ones that can cabin behavior and help alter existing social norms. After developing a theoretical framework for distinguishing "fiat" from "structure," the Article tackles the puzzling question why legislatures persist in focusing almost exclusively on fiat-based measures despite the availability of more effective structural ones. The answer turns out to be surprisingly complex, ranging from institutional …

Tarasoff As A Duty To Treat: Insights From Criminal Law, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In most jurisdictions, the Tarasoff duty is defined as a duty on the part of mental health professionals to act on patient threats of serious harm to identified individuals. Although breach of this duty has, to date, only led to civil liability, a good case can that it should lead to criminal liability as well, not just for something minor like a failure to report a potential crime, but for the felony committed by the patient. Furthermore, to the extent Tarasoff requires merely a warning after a serious threat to an identified victim, this civil and criminal liability could logically …

Jury Sentencing In Non-Capital Cases: Comparing Severity And Variance With Judicial Sentences In Two States, Nancy J. King, Rosevelt L. Noble

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Recently, commentators have championed sentencing byjury as more democratic and better suited to current theories of punishment than sentencing by judge alone. Yet discussions of noncapitaljury sentencing either fail to address empirical questions or rely on outdated and incomplete studies. This study is the first to present basic information on the comparative severity and variance of jury and judge sentencing as practiced in the 21st century. We use archival sentencing data from two of the six states that authorize jury sentencing-Arkansas and Virginia. In both states, voluntary sentencing guidelines govern judicial sentencing after bench trial or guilty plea, but juries …

When Process Affects Punishment: Differences In Sentences After Guilty Plea, Bench Trial, And Jury Trial In Five Guidelines States, Nancy J. King, David A. Soule, Sara Steen, Robert R. Weidner

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The research reported in this Essay examines process discounts-differences in sentences imposed for the same offense, depending upon whether the conviction was by jury trial, bench trial, or guilty plea-in five states that use judicial sentencing guidelines. Few guidelines systems expressly recognize "plea agreement" as an acceptable basis for departure, and none authorizes judges to vary sentences based upon whether or not the defendant waived his right to a jury trial and opted for a bench trial. Nevertheless, we predicted that because of the cost savings resulting from waivers, judges and prosecutors in any sentencing system would ensure that guilty …

From No Means No To Only Yes Means Yes: The Rational Results Of An Affirmative Consent Standard In Rape Law, Nicholas J. Little

Vanderbilt Law Review

2003 saw the arrest of the star basketball player Kobe Bryant on charges of forcing a woman to have sex with him, charges that were dropped in 2004. This arrest is perhaps the most prominent in what has become a sordid procession of public shame: the charging of professional athletes with crimes of sexual assault. As is common in rape charges, neither party denies that the sex took place. Instead the argument is based on whether the woman consented to it. In the apology Bryant issued that led to the dismissal of the charges, he admits that "[a]lthough I truly …

Taking Miranda's Pulse, William T. Pizzi, Morris B. Hoffman

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Supreme Court decided five Miranda1 cases in 2003-2004, making this one of the most active fifteen-month periods for the law of self-incrimination since the controversial case was decided in 1966. In this Article, we consider three of those five cases-Chavez v. Martinez, Missouri v. Seibert and United States v. Patane-along with the blockbuster decision four years ago in Dickerson v. United States. in an attempt to decipher what, if anything, this remarkable level of activity teaches us about the direction of the Court's self-incrimination jurisprudence. In the end, while these cases, like those before them, may not entirely clarify …

Reenvisioning Law Through The Dna Lens, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In recent times, no development has transformed the practice of criminal justice as much as DNA evidence. In little over fifteen years, DNA profiling has produced nothing short of a paradigm shift.1 For police and prosecutors, DNA has become a potent weapon for identifying and convicting criminals. Trace biological material left at a crime scene now provides critical evidence for generating leads through "cold searches" of DNA databases and for convicting defendants at trial. At the same time, for defense attorneys, DNA has become an invaluable tool for seeking exonerations, because just as DNA can link defendants to crimes, it …