Criminal Law Commons^™

Realities Of Rape: Of Science And Politics, Causes And Meanings, Owen D. Jones

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This review essay discusses the book A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion, by Randy Thornhill and Craig Palmer (MIT Press, 2000). The essay builds on work previously appearing in Owen D. Jones, Sex, Culture, and the Biology of Rape: Toward Explanation and Prevention, 87 Cal. L. Rev. 827 (1999) and Owen D. Jones, Law and the Biology of Rape: Reflections on Transitions, 11 Hastings Women's Law Journal 151 (2000).

Essential Elements, Nancy J. King, Susan R. Klein

Vanderbilt Law Review

For well over a century the United States Supreme Court has debated who has final authority to define what is a "crime" for purposes of applying the procedural protections guaranteed by the Constitution in criminal cases. After numerous shifts back and forth from judicial to legislative supremacy,' the Court has settled upon a multi-factor analysis for policing the criminal-civil divide, an analysis that permits courts to override legislative intent to define an action as civil in the rare case where the action waddles and quacks like a crime. This tug-of-war over the finality of legislative labels in defining crime and …

An Empirically Based Comparison Of American And European Regulatory Approaches To Police Investigation, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This article takes a comparative and empirical look at two of the most significant methods of police investigation: searches for and seizures of tangible evidence and interrogation of suspects. It first compares American doctrine regulating these investigative tools with the analogous rules predominant in Europe (specifically, England, France and Germany). It then discusses research on the American system that sheds light on the relative advantages and disadvantages of the two regulatory systems. More often than not, the existing data call into question preconceived notions of what "works." In particular, American reverence for search warrants, the exclusionary rule, and "Miranda" warnings …

Specific Crime Vs. Criminal Ways: Criminal Conduct And Responsibility In Rule 3e1.1, Matthew Richardson

Vanderbilt Law Review

The United States Sentencing Commission ("Sentencing Commission") drafted Rule 3E1.1 with an inherent ambiguity, one that concerns both the Rule's purpose and design. Rule 3E1.1 allows for a reduction in sentence if a criminal "accepts responsibility" for his offense.' As result of the Rule's ambiguous language, prior tensions in interpretation of its meaning have spilled over into the current debate over sentence reductions.

The inherent ambiguity results from the Rule's genesis. The Sentencing Commission enacted the Rule with the purpose of increasing predictability in sentencing by reducing judicial discretion. Before the enactment of the Rule, mitigating and aggravating circumstances allowed …

A Predictive Framework For The Effectiveness Of International Criminal Tribunals, James B. Griffin

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Note examines international criminal tribunals and analyzes the factors that can govern the level of their effectiveness. The historical background in this area is essential, for one of the main points of the Note is that international criminal tribunals cannot be detached from the political circumstances that create them and enforce their verdicts if those verdicts are to be enforceable at all.

The Note begins with an analysis of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, and compares it to its contemporary counterpart, the International Military Tribunal at Tokyo. The Note then makes a similar analysis of the recent International …

"Apprendi" And Plea Bargaining, Nancy J. King, Susan Riva Klein

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Before "Apprendi", prosecutors using recidivism as a club could, and did, regularly insist that defendants admit aggravating facts as part of the plea or face additional time. When the prosecutor's threats of added time were not persuasive and the proof of aggravating facts weak, the defendant prior to "Apprendi" could refuse to admit to the aggravating fact, and plead guilty only to the offense without the aggravating fact. Nothing about "Apprendi" gives additional leverage to the prosecutor in this situation. A defendant who, prior to "Apprendi", decided to risk trial rather than face the aggravated sentence will make the same …

Essential Elements, Nancy J. King, Susan Riva Klein

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The Court has struggled for well over a century with the issue of who has final authority to define what is a "crime" for purposes of applying procedural protections guaranteed by the Constitution in criminal cases. Just as labeling an action "civil" may allow the government to circumvent constitutional criminal procedure entirely, so labeling a fact an "affirmative defense" or a "sentencing factor" instead of an element of the offense may allow the government to escape constitutional criminal procedure selectively, bypassing the burden of proof, pleading, and jury requirements that would otherwise apply to an offense element. In its decision …

An End To Insanity: Recasting The Role Of Mental Disability In Criminal Cases, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This article argues that mental illness should no longer be the basis for a special defense of insanity. Instead, mental disorder should be considered in criminal cases only if relevant to other excuse doctrines, such as lack of mens rea, self-defense and duress, as those defenses have been defined under modern subjectively-oriented codes. With the advent of these subjectively defined doctrines (a development which, ironically, took place during the same period that insanity formulations expanded), the insanity defense has outlived its usefulness, normatively and practically. Modern official formulations of the defense are overbroad because, fairly construed, they exculpate the vast …

A Proposal To Strengthen Juvenile Miranda Rights: Requiring Parental Presence In Custodial Interrogations, Robert E. Mcguire

Vanderbilt Law Review

On October 31, 1997, eleven-year-old Nathaniel Abraham was at school and enjoying Halloween with his grade school classmates. The festivities ended, however, when members of the Pontiac, Michigan police department entered the classroom and arrested Nathaniel for first degree murder. Two days before, on October 29, eighteen- year-old Ronnie Lee Greene was walking out of a convenience store in Pontiac when a .22 caliber bullet struck him in the head and killed him.' Police suspected Nathaniel who, at the time of his arrest, had over twenty encounters with law enforcement. Once in custody, Nathaniel eventually confessed to shooting Greene and …

Avoiding The Appearance Of Judicial Bias: Allowing A Federal Criminal Defendant To Appeal The Denial Of A Recusal Motion Even After Entering An Unconditional Guilty Plea, Nancy B. Pridgen

Vanderbilt Law Review

One of the most fundamental social interests is that law shall be uniform and impartial. There must be nothing in its action that savors of prejudice or favor or even arbitrary whim or fitfulness. A suspect is charged with a federal crime, obtains legal counsel, and finds out who his judge will be. Because of a prominent rumor circulating in the community that the defendant once had an affair with the judge's wife, the defendant questions the judge's ability to be fair with him. He and his counsel file a timely motion for recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a).' The …

Foreword: Is Justice Just Us?, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This is a review of JUSTICE, LIABILITY AND BLAME, by Paul Robinson and John Darley. The book is a summary of 18 studies which surveyed lay subjects about their attitudes toward various aspects of criminal law doctrine, including the act requirement for attempt, omission liability, accomplice liability, the felony-murder role, and the intoxication and insanity defenses. In virtually every study, the authors found that the subjects disagreed with the Model Penal Code's position, the common law's position, or both. The authors contend that results of surveys such as theirs should play a significant role in designing criminal doctrine, both because …

The Criminal Defense Lawyer's Fiduciary Duty To Clients With Mental Disability, Christopher Slobogin, Amy Mashburn

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This Article has argued that the defense attorney has a multifaceted fiduciary duty toward the client with mental disability. That duty requires, first and foremost, respect for the autonomy of the client. The lawyer shows that respect not only by heeding the wishes of the competent client but by refusing to heed the wishes of the incompetent client. A coherent approach to the competency construct is therefore important. Following the lead of Professor Bonnie, this Article has broken competency into two components: assistance competency and decisional competency. It has defined the former concept in traditional terms, as an understanding of …

The Reach Of Icc Jurisdiction Over Non-Signatory Nationals, Jordan J. Paust

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

A new International Criminal Court (ICC) was created on July 17, 1998 under the Rome Statute adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference on Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court. Under the Statute, the ICC will have jurisdiction over crimes of genocide, certain crimes against humanity, and certain war crimes, leaving the crime of aggression for further definition.

Nonetheless, there are certain preconditions to the exercise of such jurisdictional competence, as noted especially in Articles 12-14 of the Statute. In general, the Court can exercise jurisdiction if a "situation" or case (1) is referred to the Prosecutor …

Basic Rights And Anti-Terrorism Legislation, Kevin D. Kent

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Note addresses whether Britain's Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act (CJTCA), which permits police officer opinion testimony as to whether a terrorist suspect is a member of an illegal terrorist organization and allows adverse inferences to be drawn from that suspect's silence, can be reconciled with the fair trial provisions of the Human Rights Act (HRA). Part II of this Note describes the background of the CJTCA, concentrating on the reasons for its rushed passage and on the evidentiary changes it makes to trials of defendants charged with terrorist offenses. Part II describes the background and mechanics of the …

Not Twice For The Same: How The Dual Sovereignty Doctrine Is Used To Circumvent "Non Bis In Idem", Dax E. Lopez

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Today, it is quite possible for a criminal defendant who has violated the laws of several countries with one criminal act to be subject to multiple prosecutions. In situations where two countries share concurrent criminal jurisdiction, it is unclear whether the defendant would be able to rely on some level of double jeopardy protection. International law currently does not obligate a sovereign state to recognize another state's penal judgments, thus allowing states to prosecute a defendant regardless of any legal action that may have been previously taken against the defendant. Several countries, however, have chosen to provide defendants with at …

Witch Doctors And Battleship Stalkers: The Edges Of Exculpation In Entrapment Cases, John F. Preis

Vanderbilt Law Review

The bumbling criminal has long been humorous to the law-abiding. Take, for example, a man recently intent on robbing a bank. The man entered a Bank of America bank, grabbed a deposit slip, and wrote on it "This iz a stikkup. Put all your muny in this bag."' While waiting in line for a teller, he became worried that someone had seen him write the note and would inform the police. Thus, he exited the bank, walked across the street to the Wells Fargo bank, and gave the note to a teller. The teller, probably sensing his lack of dangerousness …

Corporate Liability, Risk Shifting, And The Paradox Of Compliance, William S. Laufer

Vanderbilt Law Review

The evolution of corporate criminal law is explained by the shifting risks of liability and loss between corporations and their agents in accommodating the illogic of vicarious liability. A vivid example of the effects of this risk shifting is seen with the recent emergence of the good citizen corporation movement. This movement en- courages prosecutors with vast discretion to leverage indictments and convictions of subordinate agents, resort to civil and administrative actions against large and medium-sized corporations in place of criminal indictments, compromise agent indemnification, and enforce corporate self-regulation through elaborate plea agreements. Not surprisingly, organizations tend to conceive of …

Sex, Culture, And The Biology Of Rape: Toward Explanation And Prevention, Owen D. Jones

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

For all that has been written about rape, its multiple causes remain insufficiently understood for law to deter it effectively. This follows, in part, from inadequately interdisciplinary study of rape causation. This Article argues that integrating life science and social science perspectives on sexual aggression can improve law's model of rape behavior, and further our efforts to reduce its incidence.

The Article first explains biobehavioral theories of sexual aggression, and offers a guide to common but avoidable errors in assessing them. It then compares a number of those theories' predictions with existing data and demonstrates how knowledge of the effects …

Humpty Dumpty On Mens Rea Standards: A Proposed Methodology For Interpretation, Katherine R. Tromble

Vanderbilt Law Review

"When I use a word.., it means just what I choose it to mean-neither more nor less.", This statement by Humpty Dumpty sets forth the argument of this Note: words used to describe mens rea in federal criminal statutes have plain, ordinary meanings. When the United States Supreme Court interprets these statutes, it should do so according to the words' plain meanings. Because the Court has not used this approach in past cases, the law of mens rea on the federal level is confusing and inconsistent.

The Court has tried to repair poorly drafted statutes by interpreting them in various …

Non-Immigration Visa Fraud: Proposals To End The Misuse Of The L Visa By Transnational Criminal Organizations As A Method Of Illegal Immigration, Amy Mccallen

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Note examines why the L visa is particularly vulnerable to multinational fraud and proposes both a domestic and an international solution to combat this abuse. Part II of this Note addresses the governmental policies behind the L visa. This section provides an overview of the origins of the transnational company and discusses the reasons why Congress created the L visa to meet the needs of this specialized segment of international business.

Part III analyzes the bifurcated approval process for an L visa. This section surveys the requirements for the L visa and discusses why Congress believed these requirements were …

The Sheinbein Case And The Israeli-American Extradition Experience: A Need For Compromise, Abraham Abramovsky, Jonathan I. Edelstein

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Article will examine the political ramifications of the extradition process and the need for compromise to prevent domestic politics from undermining the ends of law enforcement. This Article will also suggest possible measures to ease the complications that extradition poses to international law enforcement cooperation. Part II of this Article will examine the facts of the most recent and dramatic example of the politics of extradition as played out in the Sheinbein case. Part III will analyze other issues which have placed obstacles in the path of practical law enforcement and international relations, and the way that the United …

The American Criminal Jury, Nancy J. King

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

As juries become both less common and more expensive, some have questioned the wisdom of preserving the criminal jury in its present form. The benefits of the jury are difficult to quantify, but jury verdicts continue to earn widespread acceptance by the public and trial by jury remains a cherished right of most Americans. In any event, many basic features of the criminal jury in the United States cannot be modified without either constitutional amendment or radical reinterpretations of the Bill of Rights. Judges and legislators continue to tinker within constitutional confines, some hoping to improve the jury trial by …

Qualified Immunity: Ignorance Excused, Barbara E. Armacost

Vanderbilt Law Review

Public officials receive qualified immunity from damages liability for constitutional violations if they reasonably could have believed their actions were constitutional under clearly established law. In this regard qualified immunity is quite unusual. In most other legal contexts, failure to know the law is virtually never excused. The only other context where notice or knowledge of illegality plays any role is in criminal law, but even mistakes of penal law are rarely excused.

In this Article, Professor Armacost uses fair notice in criminal law as a paradigm for analyzing the role of notice in constitutional damages actions. She argues that …

Silencing Nullification Advocacy Inside The Jury Room And Outside The Courtroom, Nancy J. King

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Jurors in criminal cases occasionally "nullify" the law by acquitting defendants who they believe are guilty according to the instructions given to them in court. American juries have exercised this unreviewable nullification power to acquit defendants who face sentences that jurors view as too harsh, who have been subjected to what jurors consider to be unconscionable governmental action, who have engaged in conduct that jurors do not believe is culpable, or who have harmed victims whom jurors consider unworthy of protection. Recent reports suggest jurors today are balking in trials in which a conviction could trigger a "three strikes" or …

Coping With "Loss": A Re-Examination Of Sentencing Federal Economic Crimes Under The Guidelines, Frank O. Bowman, Iii

Vanderbilt Law Review

The primary determinant of sentence length for federal economic criminals is the amount of "loss" resulting from an offender's conduct.' The idea of basing sentences for economic crimes primarily on "loss" has become the source of ongoing, complex, and proliferating disputes about what the term "loss" really means and how it should be interpreted in particular cases. The "loss" calculation is one of the most frequently litigated issues in federal sentencing law. There are at present splits of opinion between the federal circuits on at least eleven analytically distinct issues concerning the meaning and application of the "loss" concept. Even …

Section 2254(D) Of The New Habeas Statute: An (Opinionated) User's Manual, Evan T. Lee

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 made wholesale changes to the federal habeas corpus statute. In particular, the statute contains a new section 2254(d), which controls the standards that federal habeas courts must employ when reviewing state convictions. This new provision governing the standards of review applies generally to petitions filed after April 24, 1996, the effective date of the Act. The provision's text, however, is critically ambiguous in several respects. Because most of the federal circuit courts of appeal have not yet settled even basic interpretive questions about section 2254(d), federal district courts and circuit panels …

Melting The Plastic Theories: Advocating The Common Law Of Fraud In Credit Card Non-Dischargeability Actions Under 11 U.S.C. § 523(A)(2)(A), Craig A. Bruens

Vanderbilt Law Review

If credit card-holders purchase items they cannot afford, they may make minimum payments and avoid default. Most people carry debt on their credit cards,' and card-issuers who profit from interest on these balances encourage consumers to carry a balance. When a debtor acquires too much debt and files for bankruptcy, the debtor may generally discharge all of his debts to gain a "fresh start." This discharge of debts completely bars creditors from collecting the money owed to them, and the resulting losses have frustrated the credit card industry.

To prevent debts from becoming uncollectible due to discharge, credit card-issuers frequently …

Bargaining About Future Jeopardy, Daniel C. Richman

Vanderbilt Law Review

The debate about how much protection criminal defendants should have against successive prosecutions has generally been conducted in the context of how to interpret the Double Jeopardy Clause. The doctrinal focus of this debate ignores the fact that for the huge majority of defendants-those who plead guilty instead of standing trial-the Double Jeopardy Clause sin- ply sets a default rule, establishing a minimum level of protection when defendants choose not to bargain about the possibility of future charges. In this Article, Professor Richman examines the world that exists in the shadow of minimalist double jeopardy doctrine, exploring the dynamics of …

The Ills Of The Federal Sentencing Guidelines And The Search For A Cure: Using Sentence Entrapment To Combat Governmental Manipulation Of Sentencing, Robert S. Johnson

Vanderbilt Law Review

Consider the following scenario:' The police conduct an under- cover sting operation targeting drug traffickers. An undercover officer approaches a suspected drug dealer and arranges to purchase crack cocaine. Over a period of five weeks, the suspect makes seven sales to the officer, and the police arrest him after the final sale. The total amount sold by the defendant was 50.4 grams, just enough to place him within the mandatory minimum sentence of ten years. Had he sold up to 49.9 grams, his mandatory minimum sentence would only have been five years. The district court hearing this case found it …

Nameless Justice: The Case For The Routine Use Of Anonymous Juries In Criminal Trials, Nancy J. King

Vanderbilt Law Review

We ask a lot of our jurors. The financial and emotional burdens of jury duty can be significant even in mundane cases. Deciding another's fate is often a trying ordeal, aggravated by unintelligible instructions, hostile attorneys or court personnel, miserable working conditions, and interminable delays. The voir dire process may require jurors to reveal intimate, embarrassing, or damning information about themselves and their families that they would not voluntarily choose to reveal. Confronted with allegations of violence, injury, or abuse, some jurors become traumatized or ill. On top of all of this, jury service exposes jurors, their families, and their …