Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Juries, Drug Laws & Sentencing (Symposium), Nancy S. Marder

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Respecting Pandora's Box, Erica Beecher-Monas

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Fallen Superheroes And Constitutional Mirages: The Tale Of Brady V. Maryland, Scott E. Sundby

Articles

No abstract provided.

One Small Step For Women: Female-Friendly Provisions In The Rome Statute Of The International Criminal Court, Rana R. Lehr-Lehnardt

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

Treat Your Women Well: Comparisons And Lessons From An Imperfect Example Across The Waters, Rana R. Lehr-Lehnardt

Faculty Works

A young woman could not endure another night with the elderly man she was forced to marry, so she slipped out of the house and spent the night with the young man she had loved for years and desperately wanted to marry. When the woman's father learned of the illicit behavior, he entered the police station where she had sought refuge and fired four shots at her. He shed his daughter's blood to cleanse the family's honor. Jordan, 1999

A jealous husband returned home from an evening at the mosque and accused his pregnant wife of having an affair. The …

Quiet Rebellion Ii: An Empirical Analysis Of Declining Federal Drug Sentences Including Data From The District Level, Frank O. Bowman, Michael Heise

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This is the second of two articles in which we seek an explanation for the hitherto unexamined fact that the average length of prison sentences imposed in federal court for narcotics violations declined by more than 15% between 1991-92 and 2000.

Our first article, Quiet Rebellion? Explaining Nearly a Decade of Declining Federal Drug Sentences, 86 Iowa Law Review 1043 (May 2001) ( "Rebellion I" ), examined national sentencing data in an effort to determine whether the decline in federal drug sentences is real (rather than a statistical anomaly), and to identify and analyze possible causes of the decline. We …

A Question Of Revenge: Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy And A Proposed Diminished Capacity Defense For Homicidal Mothers, E. Selene Steelman

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note argues that Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy (MSBP) should be legally recognized as a severe mental disorder, allowing defendants to use a diminished capacity defense in cases of accidental filicide. The author critiques the legal system's inconsistent treatment of MSBP, which often focuses on the physical harm to the child while neglecting the mother's mental state. By acknowledging MSBP as a psychiatric disorder, the law could achieve more nuanced outcomes that consider both the act and the defendant's mental condition, reducing stigma and promoting fairness in criminal liability assessments.

Disturbing And Inspiring, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

Book review of A Trial by Jury, by D. Graham Burnett, Knopf, 2001.

Activism As Restraint: Lessons From Criminal Procedure, Stephen F. Smith

Journal Articles

In this Article, I advance a limited defense of judicial activism by the Burger and Rehnquist Courts in constitutional criminal procedure. My basic claim is that even if the so-called "Counterrevolution" in criminal procedure is viewed as activist -- as I think much of it must be -- it nevertheless was normatively defensible as a necessary condition, in a “second-best” world, of reaching an equilibrium closer to the judicial restraint model than would be possible if activism were only a one-way ratchet. Though my thesis supplies a justification for the Burger and Rehnquist Court's basic approach to legal change, it …

The Impossible Dream Come True: A Criminal Law Professor Becomes Juror #7, Stacy Caplow

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Dial-In Testimony, Richard D. Friedman, Bridget Mary Mccormack

Articles

For several hundred years, one of the great glories of the common law system of criminal justice has been the requirement that prosecution witnesses give their testimony in the presence of the accused" face to face," in the time-honored phrase-under oath, subject to cross-examination, and, unless unfeasible, in open court. In the United States, this principle is enshrined in the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, which provides that "[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him." But now a new way is developing for witnesses for the prosecution …

The Conundrum Of Children, Confrontation, And Hearsay, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

The adjudication of child abuse claims poses an excruciatingly difficult conundrum. The crime is a terrible one, but false convictions are abhorrent. Often the evidence does not support a finding of guilt or innocence with sufficient clarity to allow a decision free of gnawing doubt. In many cases, a large part of the problem is that the prosecution's case depends critically on the statement or testimony of a young child. Even with respect to adult witnesses, the law of hearsay and confrontation is very perplexing, as anyone who has studied American evidentiary law and read Supreme Court opinions on the …

Proposed Amendments To Fed. R. Crim. P. 26: An Exchange: Remote Testimony, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

Recently, the Supreme Court declined to pass on to Congress a proposed change to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 26 submitted to it by the Judicial Conference. In this Article, Professor Friedman addresses this proposal, which would allow for more extensive use of remote, video-based testimony at criminal trials. He agrees with the majority of the Court that the proposal raised serious problems under the Confrontation Clause. He also argues that a revised proposal, in addition to better protecting the confrontation rights of defendants, should include more definite quality standards, abandon its reliance on the definition of unavailability found in …

The Ins And Outs, Stops And Starts Of Speedy Trial Rights In Colorado--Part Ii, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

This two-part article reviews the constitutional and statutory right to a speedy trial and discusses the case law interpreting that right. The first part was printed in July 2002.

See Part I at http://scholar.law.colorado.edu/articles/550/.

Do Jury Trials Encourage Harsh Punishment In The United States?, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Pathological Politics Of Criminal Law, William J. Stuntz

Michigan Law Review

Substantive criminal law defines the conduct that the state punishes. Or does it? If the answer is yes, it should be possible, by reading criminal codes (perhaps with a few case annotations thrown in), to tell what conduct will land you in prison. Most discussions of criminal law, whether in law reviews, law school classrooms, or the popular press, proceed on the premise that the answer is yes. Law reform movements regularly seek to broaden or narrow the scope of some set of criminal liability rules, always on the assumption that by doing so they will broaden or narrow the …

A Hybrid Approach To The Use Of Deliberate Ignorance In Conspiracy Cases, Jessica A. Kozlov-Davis

Michigan Law Review

When hunted, the ostrich is said to run a certain distance and then thrust its head into the sand, thinking, because it cannot see, that it cannot be seen by the hunters. Legal parlance therefore refers to the "ostrich instruction," used when a defendant acts with the awareness of a high probability of the existence of an incriminating fact, but remains deliberately ignorant as to whether the fact actually exists, hoping his ignorance will maintain his innocence. The defendant is like the ostrich - he thinks that if he does not actually see the facts, even though he knows they …

"Be Careful What You Ask For": The 2000 Presidential Election, The U.S. Supreme Court, And The Law Of Criminal Procedure, Craig M. Bradley, Joseph L. Hoffmann

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Make Way For The Aba: Smith V. Robbins Clears A Path For Anders Alternatives, James E. Duggan, Andrew W. Moeller

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

Indigents appealing criminal convictions are entitled to court-appointed counsel. The American Bar Association suggests a standard for providing the required representation. This standard is known as the Idaho Rule.

No-Merit Briefs Undermine The Adversary Process In Criminal Appeals, Randall L. Hodgkinson

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

Appellate defense attorneys face a dilemma when faced with an appeal that has no obvious merit. No-merit briefs allow an attorney to forego an appeal when there is no apparent merit. In cases involving direct appeals from conviction, the cost of abandonment of the client far outweighs the benefits.

When Reasonable Jurists Could Disagree: The Fifth Circuit's Misapplication Of The Frivolousness Standard, Brent E. Newton

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

A criminal appeal that is deemed frivolous is summarily dismissed without further judicial consideration. The frequency of findings of frivolousness in the Fifth Circuit has caused concern among appellate practitioners and has even led to sanctions against practitioners. This article analyzes the Fifth Circuit’s frivolousness standard.

Chinese Population Transfer In Tibet, John S. Hall

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The note examines the impact of China's population transfer policies in Tibet since the 1950 invasion, arguing that these policies have led to the marginalization of Tibetans, significant environmental degradation, and human rights abuses. It explores various legal and diplomatic strategies to address these issues, including the Dalai Lama's Five Point Plan, human rights law, environmental law, and international negotiations.

Appeals In The Ad Hoc International Criminal Tribunals: Structure, Procedure, And Recent Cases, Mark A. Drumbl, Kenneth S. Gallant

Scholarly Articles

Two international criminal tribunals are developing and remaking much of international humanitarian law—the law of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. These are the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (“ICTY”)and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (“ICTR”).

For the first time, appellate practice and procedure have become vital to the development of international humanitarian law. These two ad hoc Tribunals have substantial appellate as well as trial jurisdiction. In this, they are quite different from their historic predecessors, the International Military Tribunals at Nuremberg and Tokyo following World War II, which had no appellate jurisdiction or appellate …

The Commercial Activity Exception Under The Fsia, Personhood Under The Fifth Amendment And Jurisdiction Over Foreign States: A Partial Roadmap For The Supreme Court In The New Millennium, Stephen J. Leacock

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Jury Selection Errors On Appeal, William T. Pizzi, Morris B. Hoffman

Publications

No abstract provided.

Juridical And Jurisdictional Disconnects, Mark A. Drumbl

Scholarly Articles

Although extraterritorial trials for human rights abusers certainly achieve some justice, this Article posits -- through a case-study of post-genocide Rwanda -- that the effects of such trials are circumscribed by the fact they may have little meaning among perpetrators and victims in post-conflict societies. This limited meaning particularly attaches to trials conducted extraterritorially through international tribunals as well as trials conducted in foreign national courts through the exercise of what loosely is called "universal jurisdiction." This circumscribed meaning results in these trials' having limited deterrence effects, although they may go some way to satisfying the deontological need to punish …

Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel

Articles

When I was first introduced to the constitutional regulation of criminal procedure in the mid-1950s, a single issue dominated the field: To what extent did the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment impose upon states the same constitutional restraints that the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments imposed upon the federal government? While those Bill of Rights provisions, as even then construed, imposed a broad range of constitutional restraints upon the federal criminal justice system, the federal system was (and still is) minuscule as compared to the combined systems of the fifty states. With the Bill of Rights provisions …

From Miranda To §3501 To Dickerson To...(Symposium: Miranda After Dickerson: The Future Of Confession Law), Yale Kamisar

Articles

Once the Court granted [certiorari in Dickerson] court-watchers knew the hour had come. At long last the Court would have to either repudiate Miranda, repudiate the prophylactic-rule cases [the cases viewing Miranda's requirements as not rights protected by the Constitution, but merely "prophylactic rules"] or offer some ingenious reconciliation of the two lines of precedent. The Supreme Court of the United States, however, doesn't "have to" do anything, as the decision in Dickerson once again reminds us.

The Doctrine Of Non-Inquiry And The Preservation Of Human Rights:-Is There Room For Reconciliation?, Michael S. Topiel

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The note explores the tension between individual human rights under international law and state interests in combating cross-border crime, focusing on the doctrine of noninquiry in extradition cases. It argues that while the Convention Against Torture imposes obligations to prevent extradition to situations of torture, the doctrine of noninquiry—where courts avoid scrutinizing the requesting state’s justice system—remains crucial for maintaining separation of powers and diplomatic relations. The analysis highlights the balancing act between protecting human rights and ensuring international cooperation in law enforcement.

Drug Tests, Arrests & Fetuses: A Comment On The U.S. Supreme Court's Narrow Opinion In Ferguson V. City Of Charleston, Brigitte M. Nahas

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article examines the Supreme Court's decision in Ferguson v. City of Charleston, where the Court ruled that a hospital's drug-testing policy for pregnant patients violated the Fourth Amendment. The analysis critiques the Court's narrow opinion for failing to provide clear guidance on future drug-testing policies, while emphasizing the unconstitutionality of using such policies primarily for law enforcement purposes. The author argues that the decision leaves unresolved questions about the balance between government interests and women's privacy and reproductive rights, particularly in the context of prenatal care and drug use.