Criminal Law Commons^™

Domination In The Theory Of Justification And Excuse, George P. Fletcher

Faculty Scholarship

The major currents driving legal theory have largely bypassed the field of criminal law. Neither the economists nor the advocates of critical legal studies ("crits") have had much to say about the theory of criminal responsibility or the proper mode of trying suspects. The economists have fallen flat in applying their rationalist models to the problems of punishing wrongdoers. The "crits" have had little to add-beyond Mark Kelman's one original and provocative article.

Of all the schools on the march in the law schools today, the feminists have had the most to say about the failings of the criminal law. …

The Role Of Firearms In Violence "Scripts": The Dynamics Of Gun Events Among Adolescent Males, Deanna L. Wilkinson, Jeffrey Fagan

Faculty Scholarship

In recent years, the use and deadly consequences of gun violence among adolescents has reached epidemic proportions. At a time when national homicide rates are declining, the increasing rates of firearm deaths among teenagers is especially alarming. Deaths of adolescents due to firearm injuries are disproportionately concentrated among nonwhites, and especially among African-American teenagers and young adults. Only in times of civil war have there been higher within-group homicide rates in the United States. There appears to be a process of self-annihilation among male African-American teens in inner cities that is unprecedented in American history. Unfortunately, few studies have examined …

Dire Wolf Collects His Due While The Boys Sit By The Fire: Why Michigan Cannot Afford To Buy Into The Death Penalty, Justin P. Brooks, Jeanne Huey Erickson

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Introduction: The Promise Of The Violence Against Women Act Of 1994, Elizabeth M. Schneider

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Preventive Detention And The Judicial Prediction Of Dangerousness For Juveniles: A Natural Experiment, Jeffery Fagan, Martin Guggenheim

Faculty Scholarship

Since 1970, legislatures have increasingly relied on preventive detention – detention before trial ordered solely to prevent an accused from committing crime during the pretrial period – as an instrument of social control. Prior to this period, detention before trial was usually ordered only to assure an accused's presence at trial or to ensure the integrity of the trial process by preventing an accused from tampering with witnesses. Today, the majority of states and the federal system have changed their laws to allow judges to detain arrestees who pose a risk to society if released during the pretrial period. Half …

Cooperating Defendants: The Costs And Benefits Of Purchasing Information From Scoundrels, Daniel Richman

Faculty Scholarship

Only the most unreflective prosecutor can avoid feeling ambivalent about cooperation. Without the assistance of defendants willing to trade testimony for the expectation of sentencing discounts, many cases worth prosecuting could not be made. But if a prosecutor maintains any distance from these defendants – as he must – he is bound to be troubled by the magnitude of the discounts that the federal system (like other systems) gives to cooperators, many of whom rank as some of the most odious people he has ever met.

The idea of purchasing testimony through sentencing discounts has a long history, of course, …

Bargaining About Future Jeopardy, Daniel Richman

Faculty Scholarship

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 simply 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 …

Comment On The Tort/Crime Distinction: A Generation Later, Michael C. Harper

Faculty Scholarship

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Professor Epstein has used the occasion of this Symposium to again voice his disapproval of the modern regulatory state.' Those of you who know me will not be surprised to hear that I disagree with the bald assertions and assumptions he makes concerning that issue. In my view, compelling reasons justify the kinds of environmental and, at least in the absence of pervasive independent employee collective representation at the work place, worker safety laws attacked by Professor Epstein.² However, I will refrain from compounding the diversion by engaging Professor Epstein on these normative issues.

Instead, I will …

Mature Adjudication: Interpretive Choice In Recent Death Penalty Cases, Bernard Harcourt

Faculty Scholarship

Capital punishment presents a "hard" case for adjudication. It provokes sharp conflict between competing constitutional interpretations and invariably raises questions of judicial bias. This is particularly true in the new Republic of South Africa, where the framers of the interim constitution deliberately were silent regarding the legality of the death penalty. The tension is of equivalent force in the United States, where recent expressions of core constitutional rights have raised potentially irreconcilable conflicts in the application of capital punishment.

Two recent death penalty decisions – the South African Constitutional Court opinions in State v. Makwanyane and the United States Supreme …

Helping, Doing, And The Grammar Of Complicity, Daniel B. Yeager

Faculty Scholarship

This essay is about the grammatical and, to a lesser extent, moral aspects of the law of complicity, which treats someone who helps someone else commit a crime as though the helper himself committed the crime. The point I hope to make here is similar to the one Professor Phillip Johnson made about what he called "the unnecessary crime of conspiracy."

Domination In Wrongdoing, George P. Fletcher

Faculty Scholarship

Blackstone had a point in identifying crimes as public wrongs and torts as private wrongs. Both crimes and torts claim victims, however, the victims' responses vary according to context. In criminal cases, the victim responds by hoping that the government will apprehend and successfully prosecute the offender. In tort disputes, the victim responds by demanding compensation.

It is unclear, however, what constitutes wrongdoing. Defining wrongdoing as the violation of rights is unhelpful, for that definition only raises other questions: Who has rights and what is their content? Therefore, to understand the nature of wrongdoing, we should seek a substantive theory …

Utility And Community: Musings On The Tort/Crime Distinction, Stephen G. Marks

Faculty Scholarship

In this Paper, I propose the following two step procedure to explain both the inclusion and exclusion of criminal utility. As a first step, I posit a full compliance utility function. This utility function includes all utilities for all activities and incorporates an assumption that all members of society will forego prohibited activities. Aa s preliminary matter, I will also presuppose common information and shared values within the community. I suggest that maximization of full compliance social utility determines what society prohibits. As a second step, I strip the social utility function of the utility from prohibited activities and drop …

Judicial Decisions And Linguistic Analysis: Is There A Linguist In The Court?, Lawrence Solan

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Feminism And The False Dichotomy Of Victimization And Agency, Elizabeth M. Schneider

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Epilogue: Making Reconceptualization Of Violence Against Women Real, Elizabeth M. Schneider

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Paul Touvier And The Crime Against Humanity, Michael E. Tigar, Susan C. Casey, Isabelle Giordani, Sivakumaren Mardemootoo

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Defending, Michael E. Tigar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Introduction, Mary Kay Kane

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Guilt, Reasonable Doubt And The Reasonable Woman, Rory K. Little

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Definition Of Hearsay: To Each Its Own, Roger C. Park

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Crime Bill Of 1994 And The Law Of Character Evidence: Congress Was Right About Consent Defense Cases, Roger C. Park

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Probability And Proof In State V. Skipper: An Internet Exchange, Roger C. Park, Ronald J. Allen

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Rape Law Pedagogy, Kate Bloch

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Reconstructing The Bill Of Rights: A Reply To Amar And Marcus's Triple Play On Double Jeopardy, Susan Herman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Cooperating Clients, Daniel Richman

Faculty Scholarship

Indicted on serious narcotics charges, Jose Lopez retained Barry Tarlow to “vigorously defend and try the case.” Tarlow was up to the task but warned Lopez that it was “his general policy not to represent clients in negotiations with the government concerning cooperation,” and that he did not plan to make any exception for Lopez. As Tarlow later explained, he found such negotiations “personally[,] morally and ethically offensive.” This arrangement suited Lopez just fine, until he wavered in his resolution. Encouraged by a co-defendant, worried about his children, and hoping to obtain an early release from prison …

Myths And Principles Of Federalization, Rory K. Little

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Let's Try A Small Claims Calendar For The U.S. Courts, William W. Schwarzer

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Imagery And Adjudication In The Criminal Law: The Relationship Between Images Of Criminal Defendants And Ideologies Of Criminal Law In Southern Antebellum And Modern Appellate Decisions, Bernard Harcourt

Faculty Scholarship

Criminal law opinions often project a distinct image of the accused. Sometimes, she is cast in a sympathetic light and may appear vulnerable or impressionable: a single mother, whose husband has died, struggling to raise her two, loving children; an impoverished, nineteen-year-old African-American with a fifth-grade education, "mentally dull and 'slow to learn;'" or a defenseless "obedient servant," protecting himself from an "adversary armed with a deadly weapon." On other occasions, the defendant may appear threatening, savage or even diabolical: a cold-blooded recidivist that escapes from a prison workcrew, brutally stabs, rapes and murders a woman, and returns for a …

Sentencing Advocacy In The Massachusetts District Courts, Wendy J. Kaplan

Faculty Scholarship

A number of recent legislative initiatives' have brought significant changes to the sentencing practices in the Massachusetts district courts. This article outlines some of these changes, and describes the variety of available district court sentences, in order to assist district court practitioners in their pursuit of effective sentencing advocacy.2 The importance of sentencing advocacy cannot be underestimated. In a system where only a small percentage of cases actually go to trial,3 it is clear that the dispositional decision, deemed a criticial stage of any criminal proceeding, presents an important opportunity for effective advocacy.4 The first section addresses the legislative changes …

Testing Penry And Its Progeny , Deborah W. Denno

Faculty Scholarship

In Penry v. Lynaugh, the United States Supreme Court held that the Texas death penalty statute was applied unconstitutionally because the trial court gave no instructions allowing the jury to “consider and give effect to” the defendant's mitigating evidence of organic brain damage, moderate retardation, and disadvantaged background. The Court considered these mitigating factors relevant because of society's steadfast belief in the lesser culpability of defendants whose criminal acts are due to a disadvantaged background, or to emotional and mental disorders. The jury must have full consideration of such evidence in order to give its “reasoned moral response” to the …