Criminal Law Commons^™

Good Faith, Bad Faith And The Gulf Between: A Proposal For Consistent Terminology, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Since the earliest days of section 24(2) jurisprudence, the phrase “good faith” has been used. For nearly as long, it has been used inconsistently. The same is true, to a lesser extent, of the phrase “bad faith.” This article traces the confusion which arises in understanding and in reasoning from the failure to restrict these phrases to single meanings. The article then proposes particular meanings for each, which would limit their applicability to extreme situations at either end of the spectrum. It is proposed that the term “good faith” should only be used in circumstances where it settles that the …

Keeping 'Reasonable Grounds' Meaningful, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Two recent Court of Appeal cases (R. v. Jir and R. v. Bush, both reported ante, pp. 53 and 29) are examples of tendencies in some recent decisions to weaken the "reasonable grounds" standard for arrest. That the reasonable grounds standard for arrest is important is beyond question. As the Supreme Court of Canada has said, Without such an important standard, even the most democratic society could all too easily fall prey to the abuses and excesses of a police state. In subtle and sometimes unintentional ways, however, the reasonable ground standard is being undermined. This short article will examine …

R. V. Ryan - Duress Is Not Necessary Where Necessity Is Sufficient, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The accused's claim in R. v. Ryan that she committed an offence in response to a history of abuse is, at a factual level, stronger than that in the landmark case of R. v. Lavallee, which first established the relevance of such a claim to criminal defences. In each case there was expert evidence about the accused's psychological condition. In Ryan, however, the accused herself testified at length about events over a period of many years and her evidence was accepted by the trial judge, unlike Lavallee where the accused did not testify at all. Further, the threats of death …

Exceptions: The Criminal Law's Illogical Approach To Hiv-Related Aggravated Assaults, Ari Ezra Waldman

Articles & Chapters

This Article identifies logical and due process errors in HIV-related aggravated assault cases, which usually involve an HIV-positive individual having unprotected sex without disclosing his or her HIV status. While this behavior should not be encouraged, this Article suggests that punishing this conduct through a charge of aggravated assault - which requires a showing that the defendant’s actions were a means likely to cause grievous bodily harm or death - is fraught with fallacies in reasoning and runs afoul of due process. Specifically, some courts use the "rule of thumb" that HIV can possibly be transmitted through bodily fluids as …

Inherent (Gender) Unreasonableness Of The Concept Of Reasonableness In The Context Of Manslaughter Committed In The Heat Of Passion, Antonia Elise Miller

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Unfettered Discretion: Criminal Orders Of Protection And Their Impact On Parent Defendants, David Jaros

All Faculty Scholarship

The last two decades have witnessed an astonishing increase in the use of the criminal justice system to police neglectful parents. Recasting traditional allegations of neglect as criminal charges of endangering the welfare of a child, prosecutors and the police have involved criminal courts in the regulation of aspects of the parent child relationship that were once the sole province of family courts. This Article explores the legal implications of vesting judges in these cases with the unfettered discretion to issue protective orders that criminalize contact between a parent and her child. I argue that procedures for issuing protective orders …

Section 5: Criminal Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Fact-Finding Without Facts, Nancy Amoury Combs

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Tribe V. Marceau, 2010-Ap-05 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Jun. 15, 2010), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In a brief order, the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals held that the Tribe could not appeal the trial court judge’s verdict of not guilty due to lack of evidence. The Court cited to Chapter 11 Sec. 11-A of the Blackfeet Tribal Law and Order Code, which limits the circumstances in which the Tribe can appeal in a criminal case. Sec. 11-B, which outlines the circumstances when the Tribe can appeal in a criminal case, does not provide that the Tribe can appeal a not guilty verdict.

Trivia From The Supreme Court Order List, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Criminal Law Jurisprudence - October 2008 Term, Richard Klein

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

R. V. Munyaneza: Pondering Canada's First Core Crimes Conviction, Robert Currie

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Canada recently completed its first genocide trial, which resulted in the conviction of the Rwandan accused, Desiré Munyaneza, for crimes committed during the Rwandan genocide. While the case is still under appeal, it represents a significant success for Canada’s relatively new core crimes legislation, the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act, and was the first prosecution undertaken pursuant to that law. Drawing upon the Munyaneza case, the authors analyze the legislation and evaluate its effectiveness. They conclude that the model is an effective one that both bodes well for Canada’s future participation in the battle against impunity, and provides …

Stopping Vehicles On A Downhill Slope: R. V. Nolet, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The law need not stay the same. The Court has indicated its clear willingness to change the law to accommodate changing social conditions, or in other circumstances. However, when the law does change, it is better for all if that happens clearly: when it is apparent that the old approach no longer governs and it is clear what the new approach will be. In this regard, more could have been hoped for from Nolet. The case raises questions about the proper approach to search issues and to detentions involving vehicle stops and seems inconsistent with previous case law in both …

Using Protection Of Privacy Legislation To Erode Privacy: R. V. Chehil, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal here in R. v. Chehil overturns the trial judge's conclusion that the accused had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information the police obtained from the computer manifest. With respect, their application of the totality of the circumstances test is subject to question at several important points. For example, in assessing the objective reasonableness of an expectation of privacy, the Court of Appeal relies on the fact that the Westjet website informs customers that "information will be disclosed to the authorities without your knowledge and consent as required by law." The court then …

Racializing Disability, Disabling Race: Policing Race And Mental Status, Camille Nelson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

A Defensible Defense?: Reexamining Castle Doctrine Statutes, Benjamin Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

Recent years have seen a proliferation of so-called “castle doctrine” statutes – laws that provide home dwellers with more expansive self-defense protections if they resort to lethal force in confrontations with intruders. The passage of such laws and subsequent uses of the defense have captured the public imagination, prompting significant media attention, as well as skeptical and critical scholarship from the legal academic community. Considering the current prevalence of castle laws and the often polarized nature of the debate concerning their application, this Article argues that it is important to excavate the doctrine from the culture wars rhetoric in which …

Ensuring The Ethical Representation Of Clients In The Face Of Excessive Caseloads, Peter A. Joy

Scholarship@WashULaw

The right of one charged with [a] crime to counsel may not be deemed fundamental and essential to fair trials in some countries, but it is in ours. From the very beginning, our state and national constitutions and laws have laid great emphasis on procedural and substantive safeguards designed to assure fair trials before impar-tial tribunals in which every defendant stands equal before the law. This noble ideal cannot be realized if the poor man charged with [a] crime has to face his accusers without a lawyer to assist him.

You can't give me too many cases, too many clients, …

Constructing Systemic Safeguards Against Informant Perjury, Peter A. Joy

Scholarship@WashULaw

Reliance on an informant's testimony as the primary basis for charging and convicting the accused is fraught with problems. While the hypothetical explicitly addresses the ethical dilemmas defense counsel faces when her client is trading false testimony in exchange for a reduced charge and shorter sentence, the hypothetical also implicitly illustrates the inadequacies of our criminal justice system's current handling of testimony from cooperating witnesses.

The focus on the ethical, and perhaps moral, obligations of Lawyer representing a potentially perjurious Client begs larger questions. Are there safeguards the prosecutor's office could employ to ensure that the trial prosecutor, who is …

The Role Of The Family In Criminal Law, Gerard V. Bradley

Journal Articles

Privilege or Punish: Criminal Justice and the Challenge of Family Ties. Dan Markel, Jennifer M. Collins & Ethan J. Leib. Oxford University Press, 2009.

The authors of Privilege or Punish (PoP) pose two questions, one descriptive and the other morally evaluative. "First, how does the criminal justice system in this country approach the issue of family status? Second, how should family status be recognized, if at all, in a criminal justice system situated within a liberal democracy committed to egalitarian principles of nondiscrimination?"

Section 4: Criminal Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Contingent Constitutionalism: State And Local Criminal Laws And The Applicability Of Federal Constitutional Rights, Wayne A. Logan

William & Mary Law Review

Americans have long been bound by a shared sense of constitutional commonality, and the Supreme Court has repeatedly condemned the notion that federal constitutional rights should be allowed to depend on distinct state and local legal norms. In reality, however, federal rights do indeed vary, and they do so as a result of their contingent relationship to the diversity of state and local laws on which they rely. Focusing on criminal procedure rights in particular, this Article examines the benefits and detriments of constitutional contingency, and casts in new light many enduring understandings of American constitutionalism, including the effects of …

Human Rights And Military Decisions: Counterinsurgency And Trends In The Law Of, Dan E. Stigall, Christopher L. Blakesley, Chris Jenks

Scholarly Works

The past several decades have seen a Copernican shift in the paradigm of armed conflict, which the traditional Law of International Armed Conflict (LOIAC) canon has not fully matched. Standing out in stark relief against the backdrop of relative inactivity in LOIAC, is the surfeit of activity in the field of international human rights law, which has become a dramatic new force in the ancient realm of international law. Human rights law, heretofore not formally part of the traditional juridico-military calculus, has gained ever increasing salience in that calculus. Indeed, human rights law has ramified in such a manner that …

Supreme Court Watch: Recent Decisions Of Selected Criminal Cases, Helen Dalphonse

American University Criminal Law Brief

No abstract provided.

The Nrc Report And Its Implications For Criminal Litigation, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

The National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, issued a landmark report on forensic science in February 2009. In the long run, the report’s recommendations, if adopted, would benefit law enforcement and prosecutors. The recommendations would allow forensic science to develop a strong scientific basis and limit evidentiary challenges regarding the reliability of forensic evidence. In keeping with its congressional charge, however, the NRC Committee did not directly address admissibility issues. Nevertheless, given its content, the report will inevitably be cited in criminal cases. Indeed, within months, the United States Supreme Court cited the report, noting …

Supreme Court Watch: Recent Decisions Of Selected Criminal Cases, Diana Tafur

American University Criminal Law Brief

No abstract provided.

Letter From The Editor, John Nohlgren

American University Criminal Law Brief

No abstract provided.

Judges Judging Judicial Candidates: Should Currently Serving Judges Participate In Commissions To Screen And Recommend Article Iii Candidates Below The Supreme Court Level?, Mary Clark

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

In the lead-up to the 2008 presidential election, the American Bar Association (ABA), among others, called upon the next president to reform the federal judicial selection process by using bipartisan commissions to screen and recommend Article III candidates for presidential nomination and Senate confirmation below the Supreme Court level. This proposal may well find support in the Obama administration, given the new president’s emphasis on bipartisan consensus-building and transparency of government operations. This Article addresses one question that the ABA and others have not: Should currently serving judges participate in bi-partisan commissions to screen and recommend Article III candidates below …

Terrorist Detention: Directions For Reform, Benjamin Priester

Journal Publications

Counterterrorism efforts by the U.S. government since 2001 have produced numerous legal controversies. One of the most controversial subjects has been the detention of individuals allegedly involved with terrorist organizations or activities. Unlike traditional criminal detainees, such persons are not held pursuant to indictment on charges pending trial or to a verdict of conviction. Unlike traditional military detainees, they are not battlefield captives from combat in a war zone against the military forces of another nation. Rather, terrorist detainees are held based on the individual's alleged connections to terrorist organizations and activities, without more. Terrorist detention, so defined, is an …

Great Strides In Section 9 Jurisprudence, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The perfect is the enemy of the good. Could the approach to section 9 laid out in Grant have been constructed differently? Yes. But are we, because of that decision, magnitudes of order clearer on how to approach section 9? Also yes. The Supreme Court's decision in Grant, seemingly the product of careful negotiation given the time it has taken for the judgment to be handed down in a fashion having a clear majority, has created what has for over 25 years been lacking with regard to arbitrary detention. Where before we had very few decisions, those decisions not easily …

The Phases And Faces Of The Duke Lacrosse Controversy: A Conversation, Angela J. Davis, James E. Coleman Jr, Michael Gerhardt, K.C. Johnson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.