Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Restraining The Prosecutor: Restrictions On Threatening Prosecution For Civil Ends, James A. Trowbridge

Maine Law Review

Prosecutors in some cases agree to dismiss criminal charges, admit a defendant to a diversion program, or enter a nolle prosequi in exchange for the defendant signing a waiver of any civil claims against law enforcement agents, governments, or private persons. The practice of a prosecutor bargaining for the release of law enforcement personnel or others from civil liability raises serious questions concerning the independence of the prosecutorial function, the relationship of prosecutors to other legal institutions, and the application of rules of professional responsibility. Generally, courts have been critical of these arrangements. The Model Code of Professional Responsibility (Code) …

State V. Durepo: Toward A Principled Maine Version Of The Impeachment Exception To The Exclusionary Rule, Andre D. Bouffard

Maine Law Review

As one might have anticipated, the broad substantive mandates of the major Warren Court exclusionary rule decisions have not been left completely intact by later Supreme Court decisions. Instead, the scope of the evidentiary exclusionary doctrine established by the Warren Court has been significantly narrowed by later Supreme Court decisions that have created numerous exceptions to the general command of the exclusionary rule that evidence obtained through unconstitutional means is inadmissible in a criminal trial. Although some members of the present Court argue that the exceptions to the exclusionary rule are consistent with the purposes of the rule, and therefore …

State V. Farnham: The Defendant's Exercise Of The Right To Stand Trial As Negative Character Evidence, Richard F. Buckley

Maine Law Review

A defendant in a criminal case may not receive a more severe sentence because he exercised his sixth amendment right to stand trial. However, determining when a court has more severely sentenced a defendant for exercising his constitutional right to a jury trial is a difficult task. Some argue that a defendant's choice to stand trial is relevant to the sentencing process as character evidence. The decision to stand trial, the argument goes, indicates a defendant's lack of remorse and an unwillingness to take the first step toward redemption by admitting his guilt. Others take the position that consideration in …

State V. Boilard: Are Jury Instructions On Statutory Defenses Essential To A Fair Trial?, Kristin A. Gustafson

Maine Law Review

In State v. Boilard, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, recently addressed the question of when the failure to instruct the jury regarding a defense available under the Maine Criminal Code constitutes error. The court held that the trial court's failure to give an instruction on the defense of justification did not rise to the level of obvious error. The court reasoned that because the instruction conflicted with the defendant's theory of defense, and because counsel for the defendant did not claim error at trial or on appeal, any argument that the defendant had been prejudiced …

State V. Harding: Municipal Police Authority And The Fresh Pursuit Statute, David S. Schuman

Maine Law Review

As early as 1551, during the reign of King Edward VI, courts held at common law that, except in cases of fresh pursuit, the power of a sheriff or justice of the peace does not extend beyond his jurisdiction. Recognizing the importance of jurisdictional boundaries as limits on a sheriff's authority, the Barons of the Exchequer denounced the possibility of "two several sheriffs in one same county," observing that "in this realm there are divers authorities, and none may exceed his limits or bounds." Modern state statutes setting forth the powers of local police continue to limit the extra-jurisdictional authority …

The Denial Of Bail Under Maine's "Proof Evident Or Presumption Great" Standard, Maureen Dea

Maine Law Review

When the framers of the Maine Constitution gathered in Portland in the fall of 1819, they decided that the document, unlike the Massachusetts Constitution on which it was based, should guarantee a right to bail pending trial. The convention adopted, apparently without debate or dissent, the following provision as part of the Declaration of Rights in article I . . .

Roving Extraterritoriality: The Murky Doctrine On State Laws Regulating Absent Citizens, Leo Schlueter

Notre Dame Law Review

It is generally agreed that sovereigns have the power to punish the crimes of their citizens abroad, at least in some situations. But sovereigns rarely exercise this power, and its contours are not well understood. This is especially true in the context of American federalism. It is unclear to what degree states have retained their sovereign extraterritorial powers, and the Supreme Court has never had occasion to fully explain their limits. Recent political developments, however, make it plausible that the question will soon arise. This Note attempts to provide some insight into the future debate over state criminal extraterritorial jurisdiction …

Criminal Law, K. David Cooke Jr., Andrew M. Healy

Mercer Law Review

The purpose of this Article is to review a selection of recent opinions from appellate courts that affect the practice of criminal law in a few important categories. This Article seeks to give guidance to both prosecutors and the defense bar in these areas, with an eye towards highlighting statements in opinions, concurrences, and dissents that display the Justices’ concerns of the current state and application of the law or projections of where the law can and should be.

Two Bites, Different Apples: The Georgia Supreme Court Revolutionizes Forty-Year Precedent On First-Offender Appeals In Howard V. State, Joshua R. Wright

Mercer Law Review

Since 1968, Georgia’s First Offender Act has provided for an alternative sentencing procedure for criminal defendants who have not previously been convicted of a felony. The Act allows trial courts to place a defendant on probation or sentence them to a term of confinement before a conviction and without entering a judgment. The significance of this procedure is that, if a defendant successfully completes the terms of their first-offender status, they are exonerated and the prosecution’s case is discharged by law. The former defendant receives no criminal conviction and their civil rights and liberties are preserved.

Survey Of Capital Cases In Georgia, Jessica L. Heywood

Mercer Law Review

This Article examines five cases decided during the Survey period: two decisions by the Supreme Court of Georgia and three decisions by federal courts involving Georgia defendants. The Georgia Supreme Court cases are a direct appeal and a habeas appeal. All three federal cases are habeas petitions by Georgia state prisoners. We included federal cases because they involve significant points of law and illustrate the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit’s continued lax oversight of habeas claims, decades after the passage of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) by Congress. The small number of cases …

Tackling Terry: Georgians’ State Constitutional Protections On Searches, Seizures, And Privacy, Hunter J. Rodgers

Mercer Law Review

Currently found in Paragraph XIII of our state Bill of Rights, Georgia has had a search and seizure provision in its Constitution for over 160 years. For the last sixty, our courts interpreted it in lockstep with the Fourth Amendment. Countless cases treat our state provision as an afterthought, only worth mention as an aside to the Fourth Amendment, or in acknowledgment that the court was not reviewing on state grounds, or both. Even where the Georgia Supreme Court issues opinions enhancing search and seizure protections, or at least arguing for it, it shunts Paragraph XIII into a corner to …

Debunking Criminal Restitution, Lula A. Hagos

Michigan Law Review

Criminal restitution—the money paid by a defendant to a victim—is often overlooked amidst growing scholarly consensus about the adverse impact of criminal court fines and fees. Restitution receives less attention because it is perceived as a fair and unobjectionable sanction with legitimate goals, while fines and fees are now widely condemned as primarily serving as a funding source for local and state governments. Consequently, the animated and extensive discourse around financial punishment largely excludes criminal restitution.

Though criminal restitution may appear to have legitimate penological purposes, it serves to perpetually punish defendants who are poor—the vast majority of those in …

Criminal Law And Procedure, Tanner M. Russo, Hallie Hovery-Murray, Alli M. Mentch

University of Richmond Law Review

This Article surveys recent developments in criminal procedure and law in Virginia. Because of space limitations, the authors have limited their discussion to the most significant published appellate decisions and legislation.

Colonizing By Contract, Emmanuel H. Arnaud

Articles

Since 1898, Puerto Rico has been a territory of the United States, meaning that Congress wields plenary power over the Island. Although scholars have highlighted the history and some modern manifestations of this power, conversations about how plenary power affects the territories have largely ignored constitutional criminal procedure.

This Article is the first to center the territory’s criminal legal system within the broader debate over the exercise of plenary power. In doing so, it fills significant gaps in the constitutional and criminal law literature on the territories by uncovering how the federal government’s plenary power affects local criminal adjudication. This …

Colonizing By Contract, Emmanuel Hiram Arnaud

Faculty Scholarship

Since 1898, Puerto Rico has been a territory of the United States, meaning that Congress wields plenary power over the Island. Although scholars have highlighted the history and some modern manifestations of this power, conversations about how plenary power affects the territories have largely ignored constitutional criminal procedure.

This Article is the first to center the territory’s criminal legal system within the broader debate over the exercise of plenary power. In doing so, it fills significant gaps in the constitutional and criminal law literature on the territories by uncovering how the federal government’s plenary power affects local criminal adjudication. This …

A Distinct System For Presidential Succession On Inauguration Day: Getting The Most Out Of Section 3 Of The Twentieth Amendment, Brian C. Kalt

Cardozo Law Review

The current presidential-succession statute uses the same line of succession for every conceivable situation. But there are many different types of potential succession scenarios. Succession need not—and should not—be governed by a one-size-fits-all approach.

Before the Twentieth Amendment was ratified in 1933, the Constitution authorized Congress to provide only for double vacancies during the term, when there already is a President and Vice President. Recognizing this gap, Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment empowered Congress to cover inauguration-day double vacancies: at the outset of a term, when nobody is available to become President or Vice President in the first place. …

Will Bruen Kill Cops?, Peter N. Salib, Guha Krishnamurthi

Fordham Law Review Online

Criminal procedure is a balancing act. On one hand, it must allow law enforcement officers to protect the public and themselves. On the other hand, criminal procedure must safeguard citizens’ individual constitutional rights—privacy, physical liberty, and bodily integrity. And now, the right to bear arms.

There is a serious tension here. Landmark Fourth Amendment cases like Terry v. Ohio, Pennsylvania v. Mimms, and Chimel v. California give the police wide latitude to seize firearms on the assumption that guns are dangerous. But these doctrines largely evolved before the Second Amendment’s ascendance. In District of Columbia v. Heller, …

A Delicate Balance: Adopting The French Court Of Cassation's Dual Criminality Interpretation, Matthew Hosler

Et Cetera

This Note recommends potential language to be added to various States’ criminal codes to incorporate the French Court of Cassation’s interpretation of the Dual Criminality requirement for prosecutions under universal jurisdiction. This recommendation stems from research into the concept of universal jurisdiction, leading to the discovery of the May 2023 Court of Cassation’s decision that created a pathway for countries to have jurisdiction over specific international crimes despite the crime being committed in another country. Specifically, this Note details the history of universal jurisdiction and its dual criminality requirement from the 17th century to modern times. Next, the Note details …

Egbert V. Boule And The Dwindling Bivens Doctrine, Luke Smith

MC Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Fundamental Failing: The Mississippi Judiciary's Abrogation Of Its Constitutional Duty, Brad Robertson

MC Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Legally Magic" Words: An Empirical Study Of The Accessibility Of Fifth Amendment Rights, Roseanna Sommers, Kate Weisburd

Law & Economics Working Papers

Fifth Amendment case law (including Miranda v. Arizona) requires that individuals assert their right to counsel or silence using "explicit," "clear," and "unambiguous" statements - or, as some dissenting judges have lamented, using "legally magic" words. Through a survey of 1,718 members of the U.S. public, we investigate what ordinary people believe it takes to assert the right to counsel and the right to silence. We then compare their perceptions against prevailing legal standards governing invocation.

With respect to the right to counsel, the survey results indicate that members of the public have a uniformly lower threshold for invocation than …

Rising Temperatures, The Prison Litigation Reform Act, And The Heat Death Of Human Dignity In Texas Prisons, Brianne Wylie

Northwestern University Law Review

This Note seeks to shed light on the life-threatening danger of extreme heat in un-air-conditioned Texas prisons. The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) starkly limits the relief available to those suffering and dying in these prisons. This Note proposes an amendment to the legislation that could create a path toward lasting relief for incarcerated people. After analyzing the effects of increasing heat on the particularly vulnerable prison population, this Note analyzes how the Supreme Court and the Fifth Circuit have handled claims alleging constitutionally violative prison conditions under the Eighth Amendment—in short, ineffectively, if at all. This Note then details …

Subjective Deliberate Indifference: The Correct Standard For Pre-Trial Detainees' Fourteenth Amendment Claims For Inadequate Medical Care, Douglas Weeks

Pace Law Review

This article examines the legal standard of “subjective deliberate indifference” as it pertains to the Fourteenth Amendment claims of pre-trial detainees facing inadequate medical care. With the Supreme Court’s evolving interpretation of constitutional protections for incarcerated individuals, this piece argues that subjective deliberate indifference offers a more appropriate framework for evaluating the state’s duty to provide adequate medical treatment. By analyzing relevant case law, including the significant distinctions between pre-trial detainees and convicted prisoners, the article highlights the necessity of considering the mental state of correctional officials in medical negligence claims. Furthermore, it explores the implications of this standard on …

Death By Jury: Jurisprudential Trends And Hybrid Capital Sentencing Authority, Jacob T. Hayes

Tennessee Journal of Law and Policy

No abstract provided.

A Defendant's Right To Counsel In Commitment Hearings For Nonpayment Of A Criminal Fine, Barbara A. Appleby

Maine Law Review

The federal constitutional right of an indigent defendant to appointed counsel in state court proceedings derives from two constitutional provisions. First, the sixth amendment, as incorporated by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment, provides the basis for an absolute right to counsel in criminal prosecutions leading to actual imprisonment. Second, the due process clause, as an independent source of individual rights, provides the basis for the right to counsel in civil proceedings. Both the sixth amendment and the due process rights may be implicated in a hearing for non-payment of a criminal fine. Title 17-A, section 1304 of …

Disparity And The Need For Sentencing Guidelines In Maine: A Proposal For Enhanced Appellate Review, Daniel E. Wathen

Maine Law Review

Perhaps in no other field of judicial endeavor is diversity and variety more apparent than when a sentencing judge considers the circumstances presented by a defendant convicted of a criminal offense. In each case, the sentencing judge confronts an individual who has no exact counterpart in any defendant previously appearing before the court for sentencing. The sentence imposed is primarily a matter of judicial discretion and is based upon consideration of the nature of the offense, the circumstances surrounding the commission of the offense, and the circumstances of the defendant. The sentencing judge formulates a specific sentence within broad statutory …

State V. Cloutier: Implied Invitees, Pretext And Plain View Under The Fourth Amendment, Dennis M. Doiron

Maine Law Review

Law enforcement officers often have occasion to follow the path to the front door of a residence in order to speak to its occupant. Upon answering the door, the occupant may hear a complaint about his barking dog, a query as to whether he witnessed the burglary next door, or a plea seeking support for the police department's Christmas charity drive. Occasionally, a police officer follows the path to a person's door and unexpectedly observes incriminating evidence or activities. In such cases, the police officer's conduct generates the issue of whether his observation implicates the fourth amendment's prohibition against unreasonable …

The Problem Of Third-Party Consent In Fourth Amendment Searches: Toward A "Conservative" Reading Of The Matlock Decision, Robert Deschene

Maine Law Review

In United States v. Matlock, the United States Supreme Court delivered its most recent and comprehensive statement on the doctrine of third-party consent. Under the doctrine, police may search a defendant's home or effects without first obtaining a judicially issued search warrant. Instead of this traditional prerequisite for a valid fourth amendment search, the police need only have the voluntary consent of a third person who possesses "common authority" over or a "sufficient relationship" to the area to be searched. At that point, the defendant's own consent becomes largely irrelevant. Both the United States and Maine constitutions provide protection against …

Unfenced: The Fourth Circuit Gives Geofencing Its First Appellate Go-Ahead In United States V. Chatrie, Jordan Wallace-Wolf

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

In United States v. Chatrie, the Fourth Circuit issued the first federal appellate opinion on the Fourth Amendment status of geofencing queries. The opinion is significant because geofences present a conceptual challenge to the framework of Carpenter v. United States, the reigning Supreme Court precedent on the Fourth Amendment status of digital searches. That opinion held that long-term tracking of a target individual was a search. However, geofencing reveals information about an indeterminate number of individuals for only a short time, in virtue of their being at a target location during a target span of time. Does the …

State V. Cloutier: Implied Invitees, Pretext And Plain View Under The Fourth Amendment, Dennis M. Doiron

Maine Law Review

Law enforcement officers often have occasion to follow the path to the front door of a residence in order to speak to its occupant. Upon answering the door, the occupant may hear a complaint about his barking dog, a query as to whether he witnessed the burglary next door, or a plea seeking support for the police department's Christmas charity drive. Occasionally, a police officer follows the path to a person's door and unexpectedly observes incriminating evidence or activities. In such cases, the police officer's conduct generates the issue of whether his observation implicates the fourth amendment's prohibition against unreasonable …