Criminal Law Commons^™

Summary Of Roberts V. State, Christina H. Wang

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, of one count of possession of a controlled substance

Summary Of State V. Catanio, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 103, Christopher Carson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This case was an appeal by the State from a district court order dismissing charges of lewdness with a minor for failure to meet an essential element of the test laid out in NRS 201.230. Catanio worked as a teacher’s aide and volunteer track coach at a middle school in Reno, Nevada. During the fall of 2002, Catanio befriended three young boys and began giving them gifts on a daily basis. The gifts escalated from candy to more elaborate, personal and inappropriate objects including video game systems, air pistols, pornographic material and condoms. In December 2002, Catanio escalated the relationship …

Pretextual Use Of Search Warrants In Federal White Collar Criminal Investigations Of Legitimate Businesses To Conduct Custodial Interrogations Of Targets, Employees, And Occupants: Can They Really Do That?, Patrick R. James, Matthew R. House

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

International Human Rights Standards In International Organizations: The Case Of International Criminal Courts, Kenneth S. Gallant

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Whose Justice - Reconciling Universal Juristidiction With Democratic Principles, Diane Orentlicher

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Was Bedeutet "Terrorismus?", Michael P. Malloy

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Lay Participation In The Japanese Justice System, Kent Anderson, Mark Nolan

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The Authors introduce and critique Japan's proposed quasi-jury or lay assessor system (saiban-in seido). The proposed mixed-court will have judges and lay people deciding together both guilt and sentences in serious criminal cases. Its proponents have promised that the lay assessor system will produce better justice in the courts and a more democratic society for Japan. The Authors first expose the competing interests in the lay assessor drafting process, examining their subtly but importantly varied proposals. Second, the Authors historically review lay participation in Japan, arguing that it has failed to deliver better justice and more democracy because the existing …

Universal Criminal Jurisdiction, Douglass Cassel

Journal Articles

Universal criminal jurisdiction is an important tool in the worldwide struggle to end impunity for serious international crimes.

Universal criminal jurisdiction is the principle of international law that permits any nation to prosecute certain serious international crimes, regardless of where they are committed, by whom or against whom, or any other unique tie to the prosecuting nation. The Recommendation applies whether or not an accused is in custody and does not address the separate topics of universal jurisdiction in civil cases or the immunities of senior government officials before foreign national courts.

Universal criminal jurisdiction developed over time as a …

So Much Activity, So Little Change: A Reply To The Critics Of Battered Women's Self-Defense, Kit Kinports

Faculty Scholarship

Prior to 1970, the term "domestic violence" referred to ghetto riots and urban terrorism, not the abuse of women by their intimate partners. Today, of course, domestic violence is a household word. After all, it has now been ten years since the revelation of football star O.J. Simpson's history of battering purportedly sounded "a wake-up call for all of America"; ten years since Congress enacted legislation haled as "a milestone . . .truly a turning point in the national effort to break the cycle" of violence; and twenty years since Farrah Fawcett's portrayal of Francine Hughes in the movie The …

Unfunding Terror - Perspectives On Unfunding Terror (Panel One), Jimmy Gurulé

Journal Articles

According to the FBI, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that claimed the lives of 2,973 innocent civilians required as much as $500,000 to stage. At the time, al Qaeda, the jihadi terrorist organization responsible for the mass killings, was operating on an annual budget between $30 and $50 million. However, despite the obvious fact that terrorists need money to support their terrorist operations and organizational infrastructure, prior to 9/11, preventing the financing of terrorism was not a priority for the United States or international community. Moreover, a comprehensive legal framework to …

The Sexual Assault Crisis In The United States Air Force Academy, Colleen Dalton

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note examines the systemic crisis of sexual assault at the United States Air Force Academy, highlighting how military culture, legal frameworks, and institutional failures perpetuate this issue. It argues that comprehensive legal and cultural reforms are necessary to address the pervasive gender discrimination and retaliation against victims. The analysis emphasizes the need for Congress to modernize the Uniform Code of Military Justice and for the military to adopt a model that promotes gender equality and accountability.

Terrorism And Unilateralism: Criminal Jurisdiction And International Relations, Madeline Morris

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Aedpa's "Adjudication On The Merits" Requirement: Collateral Review, Federalism, And Comity, Robert D. Sloane

Faculty Scholarship

The modern law of federal habeas corpus is a labyrinth of counterfactuals and arcane procedural hurdles that few state petitioners manage to navigate-as Justice Blackmun once wrote less charitably in dissent, "a Byzantine morass of arbitrary, unnecessary, and unjustifiable impediments to the vindication of federal rights." The convoluted inquiries required arise from the need to reconcile three developments of the past four decades that remain in tension with one another: first, the Warren Court's expansion of federal habeas relief, identified with Fay v. Noia and its progeny; second, the Burger and Rehnquist Courts' curtailment of that expansion, identified with Wainwright …

Apprendi And Federalism, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

Since the emergence of the Apprendi majority and its newly minted (and evolving) constitutional limits on criminal punishment, many commentators have begun to address its implications for the horizontal relations between the branches of government — between legislators and courts, between judges and juries, and between judges and prosecutors. Less widely addressed, though equally (if not more) important, has been the Apprendi doctrine’s implications for vertical relations, particularly federalism.

This essay seeks to begin to fill that lacuna in the literature. Part I explains how Apprendi undermines principles of federalism, a curious tension because several of Apprendi’s strongest defenders, particularly …

Comment, Time For A Legislative Change: Florida's Stagnant Standard Governing Mental Competency For Execution, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Shooting Ourselves In The Foot: Why Mandatory Reporting Of Gunshot Wounds Is A Bad Idea, Merril Pauls, Jocelyn Downie

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

A recent position statement by the Ontario Medical Association’s Section on Emergency Medicine called on the Ontario government to pass a law requiring physicians to report gunshot wounds to police. The Ontario government quickly passed a motion to “introduce legislation to require hospitals and physicians to report gunshot wounds and knife injuries to their local police service.” The goals behind the position statement are laudable: “to assess and reduce immediate public risk and to collect data to inform future prevention strategies.” However, mandating that physicians report gunshot wounds is an ill-conceived response to the problem of gun-related violence. It will …

Unilateral Multilateralism: United States Policy Toward The International Criminal Court, Diane Orentlicher

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Too Little, Too Late: Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel, The Duty To Investigate, And Pretrial Discovery In Criminal Cases, Jenny M. Roberts

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Consistently Revealing The Inconsistencies: The Construction Of Fear In The Criminal Law, Camille Nelson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This article focuses on the objective reasonable person standard in criminal law through the context of self defense and rape and their problematic construction. This article seeks to illustrate to law students the inconsistency of the aimed objective construction of the reasonable person standard because of its inherently subjective application. By examining People v. Goetz and State v. Alston, this article seeks to explore how societal norms reveal the undercurrent of negative associations of both gender and racial identity that lead to a subjective application of the reasonable person standard.

In Goetz, the defendant was able to successfully draw on …

Inter-American System, Claudia Martin

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Justice Still Fails: A Review Of Recent Efforts To Compensate Individuals Who Have Been Unjustly Convicted And Later Exonerated, Adele Bernhard

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Derecho Penal, Luis E. Chiesa

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Forgotten Constitutional Right To Present A Defense And Its Impact On The Acceptance Of Responbilility-Entrapment Debate, Katrice Bridges Copeland

Faculty Scholarship

This Note argues that Section 3E1.1 of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines must be interpreted to allow defendants who claim entrapment at trial to remain eligible for the acceptance-of-responsibility adjustment. To interpret Section 3E1.1 in any other way would run afoul of defendants' constitutional right to present a defense. Part I argues that the entrapment defense does not put factual guilt at issue; instead the entrapment defense challenges whether the statute should apply to the defendant's conduct. Part II contends that the legislative intent in creating the sentencing guidelines in general and the acceptance-of-responsibility adjustment in particular are furthered by requiring …

Justice Still Fails: A Review Of Recent Efforts To Compensate Individuals Who Have Been Unjustly Convicted And Later Exonerated, Adele Bernhard

Articles & Chapters

With this Article, I hope to motivate state legislators to enact responsible, practical compensation statutes and encourage courts to entertain state law and civil rights claims brought by those who have been unjustly convicted and later exonerated. I begin by looking at the reasons for enacting compensation statutes: uniformity, practicality, popular support, and fairness. Next, I dissect the arguments raised by opponents. Finally, I turn to recent judicial decisions hinting that courts may be stepping in where legislatures fear to tread.

How Different Is Death? Jury Sentencing In Capital And Non-Capital Cases Compared, Nancy J. King

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Drawing upon a recent study of felony jury sentencing in Kentucky, Virginia, and Arkansas, this essay highlights some of the similarities and differences between jury sentencing in capital cases and jury sentencing in non-capital cases. Unlike jury sentencing in capital cases, jury sentencing in non-capital cases includes functional differentials in judge and jury options for sentencing, and fewer controls on arbitrary decision-making. Jury sentencing in both contexts shares the potential for reluctance on the part of elected judges to reduce jury sentences, information gaps on the part of jurors in setting sentences, and, above all, service as a tool in …

The Political Delinquent: Crime, Deviance, And Resistance In Black America, Trevor George Gardner

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Article is largely an argument that the pervasive sense of cultural resistance in the African American community must be considered by criminal theorists as, at least, a partial explanation of “criminality” within the African American community. Woven into the fabric of African American culture is a vital oppositional element. This element, spoken of in many circles as “oppositional culture” constitutes a bold and calculated rejection of destructive mainstream values that have perpetuated social inequalities and power imbalances. African American resistance culture is captured by novelist John Edgar Wideman in his account of his brother ’s criminal lifestyle and the …

Prisons As Progressive Punishment? The State Of Corrective Services, Mark Findlay

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

In the early days of his third term as Premier of New South Wales, Bob Carr challenged his government to move away from current law and order politics and to come up with a more progressive approach to punishment. Central to this would be a reconsideration of the place of the prison in criminal justice. Prisons, by their nature and the communities they house, suffer more acutely from the factors of social exclusion that characterise the underprivileged sectors of Australian society. Without the exacerbation of a custodial experience, these characteristics alone militate against the successful reintegration of prisoners back into …

The United States Supreme Court Rulings On Detention Of "Enemy Combatants" - Partial Vindication Of The Rule Of Law, Douglass Cassel

Journal Articles

In three rulings on prolonged military detention of so-called "unlawful enemy combatants" in the "war" against terrorism, the United States Supreme Court in June 2004 shielded the rule of law from some of the more extreme excesses of the Bush Administration. However, the Court also yielded some ground and left open a number of troublesome questions.

Hierarchies Of Harm In Canadian Criminal Law: The Marijuana Trilogy And The Forcible 'Correction' Of Children, Janine Benedet

All Faculty Publications

The author examines the seemingly contradictory Supreme Court of Canada decisions which upheld the prohibition on possession of marijuana (R. v. Malmo-Levine), yet allowed the defence of “reasonable correction” for parents and teachers charged with assaulting a child (Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. Canada (Attorney General)). She argues that these two decisions speak to the limits of the criminal law and the role that section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms plays in setting those limits. These decisions are also linked by the attempt by some members of the Court to establish a …

Making It Easier To Milk The Cow: The Southern District Of New York Collapses The Culpable Participation Doctrine And Sidesteps The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, Matthew W. Goulding

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.