Criminal Law Commons^™

Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Rose, Susan Persaud

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Abar, Danielle Dupré

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Grice, Michael Elkin, Patrick Foster

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Taylor, Susan Persaud

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, People V. Morin, Lauren Tan

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Family Court, Queens County, In The Matter Of Joseph G., Annette Thompson

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Surprise Symphony: The Supreme Court’S Major Criminal Law Rulings Of The 2002 Term, William E. Hellerstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lawrence V. Texas: The Decision And Its Implications For The Future, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

State V. Melisron, Ltd., Elyakim Rubinstein, Daphne Barak-Erez, Uzi Vogelman

Translated Opinions

Appeals on judgments on the District Court in an affair of securities fraud, in which Golan Madar, Eliyahu Haelyon, Ofer Investments Ltd. and Ofer Development were convicted, and both Melisron, Ltd. and Avraham Levi was acquitted due to reasonable doubt. We are concerned with two primary issues: 1) Should a person be convicted of the offense of manipulation under section 54(a)(2) of the Securities Law if it was found that his actions were motivated by mixed intentions – a fraudulent intent and a legitimate business intent; and 2) Under what circumstances should a corporation be found criminally responsible for offenses …

Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People V. Cortes, Jennifer Feldman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Qualified Immunity: The Constitutional Analysis And Its Application, Karen Blum

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Year To Remember: The Supreme Court's Fourth, Fifth, And Sixth Amendment Jurisprudence For The 2003 Term, William E. Hellerstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Brant V. State, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 97, Jaymes Orr

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court upheld that the exclusion of expert testimony is left to the district court’s wide discretion, except in cases of abuse of its discretion. Expert testimony must be relevant and reliable to be of assistance to the trier of fact. Because Brant could not present scientific or other evidence that his interrogation witness would demonstrate that Brant’s brain injury caused him falsely confess, the district court’s discretion would not be disturbed and the judgment was affirmed.

Legal Aid And The Indigent Accused In South Africa: A Proposal For Reform, Lynn Berat

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Actual Innocence In New York: The Curious Case Of People V. Hamilton, Benjamin E. Rosenberg

Res Gestae

It is rare for a case from the New York Appellate Division to be as significant as People v. Hamilton. The case, however, was the first New York appellate court decision to hold that a defendant might vacate his conviction if he could demonstrate that he was “actually innocent” of the crime of which he was charged. Although the precedential force of the decision is limited to the Second Department, trial courts throughout the state are required to follow Hamilton unless or until the appellate court in their own Department rules on the issue. Courts throughout the state are …

Scientizing Culpability: The Implications Of Hall V. Florida And The Possibility Of A “Scientific Stare Decisis”, Christopher Slobogin

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Supreme Court’s decision in Hall v. Florida held that “clinical definitions” control the meaning of intellectual disability in the death penalty context. In other words, Hall “scientized” the definition of a legal concept. This Article discusses the implications of this unprecedented move. It also introduces the idea of scientific stare decisis—a requirement that groups that are scientifically alike be treated similarly for culpability purposes—as a means of implementing the scientization process.

Hall V. Florida: The Supreme Court’S Guidance In Implementing Atkins, James W. Ellis

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Daryl Atkins Story, Mark E. Olive

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Challenges Of Conveying Intellectual Disabilities To Judge And Jury, Caroline Everington

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The True Legacy Of Atkins And Roper: The Unreliability Principle, Mentally Ill Defendants, And The Death Penalty’S Unraveling, Scott E. Sundby

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In striking down the death penalty for intellectually disabled and juvenile defendants, Atkins v. Virginia and Roper v. Simmons have been understandably heralded as important holdings under the Court’s Eighth Amendment jurisprudence that has found the death penalty “disproportional” for certain types of defendants and crimes. This Article argues, however, that the cases have a far more revolutionary reach than their conventional understanding. In both cases the Court went one step beyond its usual two-step analysis of assessing whether imposing the death penalty violated “evolving standards of decency.” This extra step looked at why even though intellectual disability and youth …

Does Atkins Make A Difference In Non-Capital Cases? Should It?, Paul Marcus

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

A Tale Of Two (And Possibly Three) Atkins: Intellectual Disability And Capital Punishment Twelve Years After The Supreme Court’S Creation Of A Categorical Bar, John H. Blume, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Paul Marcus, Emily Paavola

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

United States V. Patane: The Beginning Of The End Of Miranda, Bryce Chauncey Loveland

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Roper V. Simmons - Supreme Court's Reliance On International Law In Constitutional Decision-Making, Jessica Mishali

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rico Section 1962(C) Enterprises And The Present Status Of The “Distinctness Requirement” In The Second, Third And Seventh Circuits, Lawrence A. Steckman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court's Analysis Of Issues Raised By Death Penalty Litigants In The Court's 2004 Term, Richard Klein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Some Mistakes Are Greater Than Others: Why A Categorical Exclusion Is A Proper Response To A Police Officer's Mistake Of Law During A Traffic Stop, Daniel J. Gilbert

Seton Hall Circuit Review

No abstract provided.

Determinants Of The Irish Bail System Before And After 1997., Adrian Berski

Reports

Bail can be defined as:

The setting at liberty of an accused person upon others becoming sureties for the accused at his trail. The decision to admit a person to bail is judicial matter and, consequently, the court cannot delegate the exercise of this judicial power to an administrative official^[1].

According to the above definition it should be emphasized that an accused person has to ensure the State that he/she will return to the court proceedings or Garda Síochána Station at the particular time. It is imperative that bail is established on the fact that a criminal is …

Vawa @ 20: Hiv, Violence Against Women, And Criminal Law Interventions, Aziza Ahmed

City University of New York Law Review

No abstract provided.

Stalled At 20: Vawa, The Criminal Justice System, And The Possibilities Of Restorative Justice, Leigh Goodmark

City University of New York Law Review

No abstract provided.