Criminal Law Commons^™

Inter-American System, Diego Rodriguez-Pinzon

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Ignorance Is Effectively Bliss: Collateral Consequences, Silence, And Misinformation In The Guilty-Plea Process, Jenny Roberts

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

In the 2009-2010 term, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide if it matters whether a criminal defense lawyer correctly counsels a client about the fact that the client faces deportation as a result of a guilty plea. Under prevailing constitutional norms in almost every jurisdiction, a lawyer does not have a duty to tell her client about many serious but "collateral" consequences of a guilty plea. Yet, in every jurisdiction that has considered the issue, that very same lawyer will run afoul of her duties if she affirmatively misrepresents a collateral consequence-every jurisdiction, that is,except Kentucky. The Supreme Court of …

The Witness Who Saw, He Left Little Doubt: A Comparative Consideration Of Expert Testimony In Mental Disability Law Cases, Michael L. Perlin, Astrid Birgden, Kris Gledhill

Articles & Chapters

The question of how courts assess expert evidence - especially when mental disability is an issue - raises the corollary question of whether courts adequately evaluate the content of the expert testimony or whether judicial decision making may be influenced by teleology (‘cherry picking’ evidence), pretextuality (accepting experts who distort evidence to achieve socially desirable aims), and/or sanism (allowing prejudicial and stereotyped evidence). Such threats occur despite professional standards in forensic psychology and other mental health disciplines that require ethical expert testimony. The result is expert testimony that, in many instances, is at best incompetent and at worst biased. The …

Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler

Faculty Scholarship

Crawford v. Washington’s historical approach to the confrontation clause establishes that testimonial hearsay inadmissible without confrontation at the founding is similarly inadmissible today, despite whether it fits a subsequently developed hearsay exception. Consequently, the requirement of confrontation depends upon whether an out-of-court statement is hearsay, testimonial, and, if so, whether it was nonetheless admissible without confrontation at the founding. A substantial literature has developed about whether hearsay statements are testimonial or were, like dying declarations, otherwise admissible at the founding. In contrast, this article focuses on the first question – whether statements are hearsay – which scholars have thus far …

Future Of Appellate Sentencing Review: Booker In The States, The Symposium: Criminal Appeals: Sentencing Appeals, John F. Pfaff

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, I look at the theoretical implications of the United States Supreme Court‘s recent contradictory sentencing cases, and I then examine how they are playing out in practice at the state level. Though Booker purports to follow, not repudiate, Blakely, its view of the role of appellate courts is wholly inconsistent with Blakely‘s view. Many states have sidestepped this contradiction by simply following Blakely and ignoring the option laid out in Booker. But at least three states have chosen to pass through the door opened by Booker. Their experiences allow us to examine the implications of Booker and …

The Effects Of Booker On Inter-Judge Sentencing Disparity, Ryan W. Scott

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

When It's So Hard To Relate: Can The Legal System Mitigate The Trauma Of Victim-Offender Relationships?, Jody L. Madeira

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This article argues that, in the aftermath of violent crime, a relationship that is both negative and involuntary can form between crime victims and offenders. This relationship fetters the victim to the crime and the criminal, rendering it difficult to recover from the transgression. To illustrate how such a relationship may form and what consequences it may have for victims, this article uses the Oklahoma City bombing as a case study, documenting through the use of original interviews an involuntary relationship in which victims' family members and survivors perceived they were tethered to Timothy McVeigh. This perceived relationship with McVeigh …

Rethinking The Federal Role In State Criminal Justice, Joseph L. Hoffmann, Nancy J. King

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This Essay argues that federal habeas review of state criminal cases squanders resources the federal government should be using to help states reform their systems of defense representation. A 2007 empirical study reveals that federal habeas review is inaccessible to most state prisoners convicted of non-capital crimes, and offers no realistic hope of relief for those who reach federal court. As a means of correcting or deterring constitutional error in non-capital cases, habeas is failing and cannot be fixed. Drawing upon these findings as well as the Supreme Court's most recent decision applying the Suspension Clause, the authors propose that …

Justice On The Ground: Can International Criminal Courts Strengthen Domestic Rule Of Law In Post-Conflict Societies?, Jane E. Stromseth

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The author examines how developments in international criminal law – including creation of the International Criminal Court and various hybrid tribunals – can have an impact on rule-of-law building efforts in post-conflict societies. Although trials of atrocity perpetrators primarily and appropriately focus on fairly trying the accused individuals, these processes also have a wider impact on public perceptions of justice and potentially can influence a society’s ability to embrace rule of law norms. The quality of outreach and capacity-building accompanying these trials may well have a decisive effect on whether these proceedings, on balance, strengthen or undermine public confidence in …

The Framers' Search Power: The Misunderstood Statutory History Of Suspicion & Probable Cause, Fabio Arcila, Jr.

Scholarly Works

Originalist analyses of the Framers’ views about governmental search power have devoted insufficient attention to the civil search statutes they promulgated for regulatory purposes. What attention has been paid concludes that the Framers were divided about how accessible search remedies should be. This Article explains why this conventional account is mostly wrong and explores the lessons to be learned from the statutory choices the Framers made with regard to search and seizure law. In enacting civil search statutes, the Framers chose to depart from common law standards and instead largely followed the patterns of preceding British civil search statutes. The …

Ethically Representing A Lying Cooperator: Disclosure As The Nuclear Deterrent, Bruce A. Green

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Case For The Third-Party Doctrine, Orin S. Kerr

Michigan Law Review

This Article offers a defense of the Fourth Amendment's third party doctrine, the controversial rule that information loses Fourth Amendment protection when it is knowingly revealed to a third party. Fourth Amendment scholars have repeatedly attacked the rule on the ground that it is unpersuasive on its face and gives the government too much power This Article responds that critics have overlooked the benefits of the rule and have overstated its weaknesses. The third-party doctrine serves two critical functions. First, the doctrine ensures the technological neutrality of the Fourth Amendment. It corrects for the substitution effect of third parties that …

The Harmful Side Effects Of Drug Prohibition, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Some drugs make people feel good. That is why some people use them. Some of these drugs are alleged to have side effects so destructive that many advise against their use. The same may be said about statutes that attempt to prohibit the manufacture, sale, and use of drugs. Advocating drug prohibition makes some people feel good because they think they are “doing something” about what they believe to be a serious social problem. Others who support these laws are not so altruistically motivated. Employees of law enforcement bureaus and academics who receive government grants to study drug use, for …

Can Our Shameful Prisons Be Reformed?, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

No abstract provided.

What’S Wrong With Victims’ Rights In Juvenile Court?: Retributive V. Rehabilitative Systems Of Justice, Kristin N. Henning

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

While scholars have written extensively about the victims’ rights movement in capital and criminal cases, there has been very little discussion about the intersection of victims’ rights and the juvenile justice system. Statutes that allow victims to attend juvenile hearings and present oral and written impact statements have shifted the juvenile court’s priorities and altered the way judges think about young offenders. While judges were once primarily concerned with the best interests of the delinquent child, victims’ rights legislation now requires juvenile courts to balance the rehabilitative needs of the child with other competing interests such as accountability to the …

The Reichstag Fire Trial, 1933-2008 : The Production Of Law And History, Michael E. Tigar, John Mage

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

You’Ve Come A Long Way, Baby: Two Waves Of Juvenile Justice Reforms As Seen From Jena, Louisiana, Sara Sun Beale

Faculty Scholarship

This article describes the origins and impact of two modern reforms that dramatically rewrote the law governing the prosecution of juvenile offenders: the Warren Court’s due process decisions and the juvenile justice legislation of the 1990s. Beginning with the prosecution of Mychal Bell, who was one of the Jena 6, the article provides a broader historical and analytical framework to assess the procedural protections available to juveniles charged with serious offenses, particularly the adequacy of the remedies to challenge prosecutorial discretion and disparate treatment by the prosecution.

The article first describes the key role race played in the Warren Court’s …

Rethinking The Identity And Role Of United States Attorneys, Sara Sun Beale

Faculty Scholarship

This article considers the proper role of politics in federal prosecutions, and how that bears on the position of the U.S. Attorney. First, the article sets forth an account of the problems disclosed by investigations into the Bush Justice Department, including the controversial firing of nine U.S. Attorneys and claims that particular prosecutions were politically motivated. It then explores the historical development of the role of the U.S. Attorneys, their relationship to the Attorney General and the Department of Justice, and their role in the contemporary federal criminal justice system.

With that background, the article considers the question whether there …

Cruel And Unequal Punishment, Nita A. Farahany

Faculty Scholarship

This article argues Atkins and its progeny of categorical exemptions to the death penalty create and new and as of yet undiscovered interaction between the Eighth and the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The United States Supreme Court, the legal academy and commentators have failed to consider the relationship between the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause and the Equal Protection Clause that the Court's new Eighth Amendment jurisprudence demands. This article puts forth a new synthesis of these two clauses, and demonstrates how the Court's new Eighth Amendment jurisprudence has remarkable Fourteenth Amendment implications. To see the point in …

Rethinking Criminal Law And Family Status , Dan Markel, Ethan J. Leib, Jennifer M. Collins

Faculty Scholarship

In our recent book, Privilege or Punish: Criminal Justice and the Challenge of Family Ties (OUP 2009), we examined and critiqued a number of ways in which the criminal justice system uses family status to distribute benefits or burdens to defendants. In their review essays, Professors Alafair Burke, Alice Ristroph & Melissa Murray identify a series of concerns with the framework we offer policymakers to analyze these family ties benefits or burdens. We think it worthwhile not only to clarify where those challenges rest on misunderstandings or confusions about the central features of our views, but also to show the …

A Call To Action: Concrete Proposals For Reducing Widespread Animal Suffering In The United States, Dana M. Campbell

Animal Law Review

No abstract provided.

Beyond Training Prosecutors About Their Disclosure Obligations: Can Prosecutors' Offices Learn From Their Lawyers' Mistakes Symposium: New Perspectives On Brady And Other Disclosure Obligations: What Really Works, Bruce A. Green

Faculty Scholarship

Prosecutors, criminal defense lawyers, judges, and legal academics from around the country recently met at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York to discuss prosecutors' compliance with their disclosure obligations. The overarching question was how prosecutors' offices could do a better job. To assist representatives of the legal profession in approaching this question from new directions, the Symposium organizers invited speakers from outside the legal profession to talk about the causes of error and methods used to reduce error in other contexts. One of the themes was that, outside the practice of law, individuals and institutions learn …

Making Sense Of Drug Regulation: A Theory Of Law For Drug Control Policy , Kimani Paul-Emile

Faculty Scholarship

This article advances a new theory of drug regulation that addresses two previously unexamined questions: how law-makers are able to regulate drugs differently irrespective of the dangers the drugs may pose and independent of their health effects, and the process followed to achieve this phenomenon. For example, although tobacco products are the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S. they can be bought and sold legally by adults, while marijuana, a substantially safer drug, is subject to the highest level of drug control. This article posits a conceptual model for making sense of this dissonance and applies this model …

Prosecutors As Punishment Theorists: Seeking Sentencing Justice, Michael A. Simons

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

It is a truism that prosecutors are called not just to win, not just to zealously represent their clients, but rather to "seek justice." What this admonition means in practice, however, is notoriously slippery. Most obviously, it means that prosecutors should not convict (or charge) the innocent. It is also quite commonly understood to mean that prosecutors should "play by the rules" and should ensure that defendants are afforded a fair process. More fundamentally, it means that prosecutors should ensure that the power of the state is wielded judiciously. In other words, the prosecutor has an obligation not just …

Culpability In Creating The Choice Of Evils, Marc O. Degirolami

Scholarly Articles

Can an actor justify criminal conduct when he was criminally culpable in creating the conditions making it necessary? Virtually every American jurisdiction answers that he cannot and bars the necessity defense under those circumstances. Whereas many scholars have condemned that response, this Article takes the very different view that the exclusion of the defense for purposeful, knowing, and reckless criminal conduct that directly causes the conditions leading to the allegedly justified act represents a sound retributivist check on what is an otherwise cruder evaluation of whether conduct is socially valuable, worthy of praise, or, in a word, justified. Criminal "created …

Introduction: Challenging The School-To-Prison Pipeline, Deborah N. Archer

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Protecting Hiv Positive Women’S Human’S Rights: Recommendations For The Obama Administration, Aziza Ahmed, Catherine Hanssens, Brook Kelly

Faculty Scholarship

To bring the United States in line with prevailing human rights standards, its National HIV/AIDS Strategy will need to explicitly commit to a human rights framework when developing programmes and policies that serve the unaddressed needs of women. This paper focuses on two aspects of the institutionalized mistreatment of people with HIV: 1) the criminalization of their consensual sexual conduct; and 2) the elimination of informed and documented consensual participation in their diagnosis through reliance on mandatory and opt-out testing policies. More than half of US states have HIV-specific laws criminalizing the consensual sexual activity of people with HIV, regardless …

Analysis Of Videotape Evidence In Police Misconduct Cases, Martin A. Schwartz, Jessica Silbey, Jack Ryan, Gail Donoghue

Faculty Scholarship

Many evidentiary issues arise with respect to the admission of videotape evidence and computer generated simulations at trial, and the authors of this Article address these issues as they arise in police misconduct cases. Professor Schwartz provides insight into and analysis of the evidentiary principles that govern the use of video and computer simulation evidence at trial in cases where police misconduct is at issue. His discussion first addresses the issues that concern the admissibility of videotape evidence, then discusses the role of a videotape on summary judgment, and lastly, analyzes evidentiary issues with respect to computer generated simulations.

A Witness To Justice, Jessica Silbey

Faculty Scholarship

In the 1988 film The Accused, a young woman named Sarah Tobias is gang raped on a pinball machine by three men while a crowded bar watches. The rapists cut a deal with the prosecutor. Sarah's outrage at the deal convinces the assistant district attorney to prosecute members of the crowd that cheered on and encouraged the rape. This film shows how Sarah Tobias, a woman with little means and less experience, intuits that according to the law rape victims are incredible witnesses to their own victimization. The film goes on to critique what the right kind of witness would …

Self-Representation In The International Arena: Removing A False Right Of Spectacle, Eugene Cerruti

Articles & Chapters

Recent historical scholarship has demonstrated that the practice of self-representation at common law was developed and promoted not to secure a valued right to the accused but rather to compromise the defendant’s ability to present an effective defense - by denying him an effective right to be represented by counsel. The Supreme Court in Faretta v. California stood this history on its head in order to read into the Sixth Amendment an implied right to self-representation equal to the now preeminent right to counsel. The Faretta doctrine was carelessly adopted yet has been resolutely defended by the Supreme Court, to …