Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Jones On Evidence: Civil And Criminal 7th Ed., Anne T. Mckenna, Clifford S. Fishman

Books

In 2004, Anne began co-authoring this seminal evidence treatise, which is in its second century of publication. Jones on Evidence (“Jones”) currently contains 5 hardbound volumes and a softbound appendix of new chapters with two new hardbound volumes forthcoming. All volumes are updated yearly. Jones enables civil and criminal practitioners in private and public practice to learn and understand evidentiary issues and evidentiary rules, including the Federal Rules of Evidence, and to use evidence effectively, whether the issue is admission, exclusion, preservation or relevance. Jones has been cited in numerous federal and state court opinions and law review …

Medical Marijuana And Personal Autonomy, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1253 (2004), Andrew J. Boyd

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Domestic Security Enhancement Act Of 2003: A Glimpse Into A Post-Patriot Act Approach To Combating Domestic Terrorism, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 327 (2004), Timothy Scahill

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Remaining Silent: A Right With Consequences, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 649 (2004), Jeffrey D. Waltuck

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Section 2254(D) Of The Federal Habeas Statute: Is It Beyond Reason?, Evan Tsen Lee

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Rethinking Miranda: Custodial Interrogation As A Fourth Amendment Search And Seizure, 37 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1109 (2004), Timothy P. O'Neill

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Punishment, Guilt, And Shame In Biblical Thought, George P. Fletcher

Faculty Scholarship

The centrality of guilt in the criminal law provides puzzling perspective in the perennial debate on the nature and purpose of punishment. Why is it that all legal systems use this highly charged moral term to refer to an essential component of liability to punishment? This question is not easily answered. The reliance on the concept of guilt in the criminal law is suffused with paradox and mystery.

Addressing Staff Sexual Misconduct With Offenders Curriculum (Instructor’S Guide: Staff Sexual Misconduct With Offenders)_2004, Brenda V. Smith, Morris L. Thigpen, Allen Ault, Anadora Moss, Dee Halley, Jaime M. Yarussi, Marcia Morgan, Susan Mccampbell

Research Reports & White Papers

Addressing Staff Sexual Misconduct with Offenders is a 36-hour training program that focuses on the complex issues surrounding staff sexual misconduct with offenders in all correctional settings. This training is designed for correctional policy makers, agency managers and administrators, and community leaders who influence correctional policy.

In this guide you will find a suggested program agenda for this training which will provide the instructor with a snap-shot of the training program as a whole. You will also find an overview of each training module, resources you will need, and activities which you may find helpful in the execution of the …

Appointed But (Nearly) Prevented From Serving: My Experience As A Grand Jury Foreperson, Phyllis L. Crocker

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

In summer 2003, I was a grand jury foreperson for the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas in Cleveland, Ohio. The service of this grand jury, and my tenure as foreperson, were unique in the annals of grand juries. We were selected and sworn in the same manner as any grand jury, but heard cases for only one day of our four-month term-the last day. In the interim, the prosecutor filed cases in two courts, seeking to discharge us, as being “tainted” by our supervising judge's initial instructions about our duties and the law. I begin this essay with basic …

Not To Decide Is To Decide: The U.S. Supreme Court's Thirty-Year Struggle With One Case About Competency To Waive Death Penalty Appeals, Phyllis L. Crocker

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

In 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed Rees v. Peyton, a case that had been on its docket since 1965. Rees was a death penalty case in which the petitioner sought to withdraw his petition for writ of certiorari so that he could be executed. The Court stayed the proceedings after Rees was found incompetent to waive his appeal, but the Court did not dismiss the case until after Rees died of natural causes. Rees pended in the Court during the terms of three Chief Justices. Even though the Court underwent major changes in personnel and philosophy during those years, …

Neighborhood, Crime, And Incarceration In New York City, Jeffery Fagan, Valerie West, Jan Holland

Faculty Scholarship

Several new studies suggest that social and spatial incarceration of young males has become part of the developmental ecology of adolescence in the nation's poorest neighborhoods. This concentration began in the 1970s, and has grown steadily through the last quarter century.The story of young men such as Cesar in Random Family illustrates the pervasive effects of both direct and vicarious prison experiences for young men and women in poor neighborhoods. Studies of street life such as Random Family, Code of the Streets, and American Project show how these experiences are now internalized in the social and psychological fabric of neighborhood …

The Future Of American Sentencing: A National Roundtable On Blakely, Ronald J. Allen, Albert Alschuler, Douglas A. Berman, Stephanos Bibas, Frank O. Bowman Iii, Daniel P. Blank, Charles R. Breyer, Steven Chanenson, Michael R. Dreeben, Margareth Etienne, Jeffrey L. Fisher, Patrick Keenan, Joseph E. Kennedy, Nancy J. King, Susan J. Klein, Rory K. Little, Marc L. Miller, J. Bradley O'Connell, David Porter, Kevin R. Reitz, Daniel C. Richman, Kate Stith, Barbara Tombs, Richard B. Walker, Robert Weisberg, Robert F. Wright Jr., Jonathan Wroblewski, David N. Yellen

Faculty Scholarship

In the wake of the dramatic Supreme Court decision in Blakely v. Washington, Stanford Law School convened an assembly of the most eminent academic and professional sentencing experts in the country to jointly assess the meaning of the decision and its implications for federal and state sentencing reform. The event took place on October 8 and 9, just a few months after Blakely came down and the very week that the Supreme Court heard the arguments in United States v. Booker and United States v. Fanfan, the cases that will test Blakely's application to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Thus the …

America's War On Drugs And Guns: The Detriments Of The Possession Standard In The Context Of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, Christan C. Rhoton

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

America's "War on Drugs" has resulted in federal legislation and sentencing guidelines that provide harsh penalties for crimes involving both drugs and guns. In particular, Title 18, Section 924(c)(1)(A) of the United States Code, which applies specifically to guns in the context of drug-related offenses, establishes mandatory punishments, ranging from five years to ten years imprisonment, depending upon the defendant's use or possession of the firearm. Congress amended Section 924 to include the term "possession" several years after the United States Supreme Court's decision in Bailey v. United States. The United States Supreme Court interpreted the "use" requirement of Section …

Lifting The Veil On Punishment, Stephen P. Garvey

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

When the state punishes a person, it treats him as it ordinarily should not. It takes away his property, throws him in prison, or otherwise interferes with his liberty. Theories of punishment try to explain why such harsh treatment is nonetheless morally permissible, if not morally obligatory. Such theories often seem to take for granted that the state in question is an upright one.

Among other things, the states in which we live fail, one might reasonably believe, to distribute wealth and power fairly among their citizens. Nor are the criminal justice systems they superintend flawless, not least of which …

The Useful, Dangerous Fiction Of Grand Jury Independence, Niki Kuckes

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Loose Not The Floodgates, Benjamin J. Cooper

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article examines the implications of the Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down sodomy laws, arguing that while the ruling was necessary, it raises concerns about the broader regulation of sexual conduct outside marriage. The author contends that such laws, despite rare enforcement, serve societal functions, including protecting marriage and providing moral boundaries that deter harmful behavior, particularly among young people.

Lawrence V. Texas: When "Profound And Deep Convictions" Collide With Liberty Interests, Nancy J. Knauer

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article examines the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which overturned Bowers v. Hardwick and invalidated a Texas sodomy law criminalizing same-sex intimacy. The author argues that Lawrence not only advanced individual liberty interests but also marked a significant shift in the legal and cultural recognition of homosexuality, moving beyond earlier frameworks that criminalized or marginalized gay individuals. The decision reflects broader societal changes in understanding same-sex relationships and challenges the use of moral disapproval as a basis for legal restrictions on consensual adult conduct.

The Shag-A-Delic Supreme Court: "Anal Sex," "Mystery," "Destiny," And The "Transcendent" In Lawrence V. Texas, Richard D. Mohr

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article critiques Justice Anthony Kennedy's majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas for its lack of clarity and robust constitutional framework. While the decision overturned Texas's sodomy law, the author argues that Kennedy's reasoning conflated liberty and equality rights, relied on vague language, and failed to establish a clear legal standard, undermining its potential to provide strong protection for LGBTQ+ rights.

Challenging Dissent: The Ontology And Logic Of Lawrence V. Texas, Jami Weinstein, Tobyn Demarco

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article examines the Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which invalidated a Texas antisodomy statute criminalizing homosexual conduct. The Court held that the statute failed rational basis review and rejected the promotion of majoritarian sexual morality as a legitimate state interest. The decision reflects a broader recognition of the fundamental right to make autonomous, private, consensual, adult sexual choices. The analysis critiques Justice Scalia's dissent, arguing that his fears about the end of morals legislation are unfounded and that laws based solely on moral disapproval lack a rational basis.

New Technology, Old Defenses: Internet Sting Operations And Attempt Liability, Audrey Rogers

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Victims' Rights Amendment…Who Is The Real Victim?, Alexis Reed

Public Interest Law Reporter

No abstract provided.

Preface, Tanina Rostain, Donald H. Zeigler

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Material Witness Statute Post September 11: Why It Should Not Include Grand Jury Witnesses, Robert Boyle

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

America's War On Drugs And Guns: The Detriments Of The Possessionstandard In The Context Of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, Christan C. Rhoton

Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest

America's "War on Drugs" has resulted in federal legislation and sentencing guidelines that provide harsh penalties for crimes involving both drugs and guns. In particular, Title 18, Section 924(c)(1)(A) of the United States Code, which applies specifically to guns in the context of drug-related offenses, establishes mandatory punishments, ranging from five years to ten years imprisonment, depending upon the defendant's use or possession of the firearm. Congress amended Section 924 to include the term "possession" several years after the United States Supreme Court's decision in Bailey v. United States. The United States Supreme Court interpreted the "use" requirement of Section …

Federalism And The Federal Criminal Law, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Reluctant Participants In Restorative Justice? Youthful Offenders And Their Parents, David R. Karp Phd, Gordon Bazemore

School of Leadership and Education Sciences: Faculty Scholarship

This paper examines offender and parental involvement in the Vermont Juvenile Restorative Panels Program. In this program, juvenile offenders on probation appear before citizen-run boards to negotiate the terms of their probation, which may include apologies, community service, restitution, and competency development tasks. Victims and parents of the offender also participate. This study reports findings from a qualitative analysis of 22 cases, including observations of panel meetings and interviews with program coordinators, offenders, parents, and victims. We find that offenders vary in the level of participation as well as in their willingness to take responsibility. Parents do not understand the …

The Free Speech Coalition & Adult Entertainment: An Inside View Of The Adult Entertainment Industry, Its Leading Advocate & The First Amendment, Clay Calvert, Robert Richards

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Sattazahn V. Pennsylvania: Double Jeopardy And The Definition Of "Acquittal" In Capital-Sentencing Proceedings, Matthew G. Howells

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Double Due Process Denial: The Crime Of Providing Material Support Or Resources To Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations, Randolph N. Jonakait

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

What Federal Prosecutors Really Think: The Puzzle Of Statistical Race Disparity Versus Specific Guilt, And The Specter Of Timothy Mcveigh, Rory K. Little

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.