Criminal Procedure Commons^™

United States V. Patane: The Supreme Court's Continued Assault On Miranda, David Bosworth

Mercer Law Review

In United States v. Patane, the United States Supreme Court ruled on the issue of whether a police officer's failure to give a suspect the complete Miranda warnings required the court to suppress a gun found as a result of the suspect's voluntary statements. In a 5-4 decision, the Court held that failure to give such warnings does not require suppression of physical evidence gained from unwarned voluntary statements. The dissenting justices were concerned about the negative effects this ruling would have on police procedures, judicial inquiries, and suspect's rights. This decision creates another exception to the Miranda rule …

The Role Of The Federal Sentencing Guidelines In The Wake Of United States V. Booker And United States V. Fanfan, Rosemary T. Cakmis

Mercer Law Review

The year 2004 began much like previous years, at least when it came to decisions from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals interpreting the United States Sentencing Guidelines ("U.S.S.G." or "federal sentencing guidelines" or "guidelines"). In less than one year, however, the federal sentencing guidelines and related Eleventh Circuit decisions took on a fascinating new dimension in light of 2004-2005 United States Supreme Court jurisprudence. This jurisprudence culminated with the January 12, 2005 Supreme Court decision in United States v. Booker, which was consolidated with United States v. Fanfan ("Booker/Fanfan"). Therein, the Supreme Court rejected the Eleventh …

Uncertain Waters: Tennard V. Dretke Provides Swells Of Protection For The Mentally Deficient But May Cause Rising Tides Of Frivolous Claims, Kristin L. Starnes

Mercer Law Review

Continuing to address the morality and constitutionality of executing mentally deficient offenders, the United States Supreme Court in Tennard v. Dretke held that the Texas jury instructions used during the sentencing phase violated the Eighth Amendment. The jury instructions were unconstitutional because they did not provide sentencers with an adequate vehicle for assessing the defendant's mitigating evidence of low Intelligence Quotient. This case has broad implications for jury instructions in capital cases across the nation. It also raises concerns that valid claims by deserving defendants will be lost in a sea of frivolous claims and unidentified intelligence tests.

To Serve And Protect: Thornton V. United States And The Newly Anemic Fourth Amendment, Jason Lewis

Mercer Law Review

In Thornton v. United States, the United States Supreme Court further weakened the protection afforded by the Fourth Amendment by holding that an officer may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to arrest even when the suspect is first approached after exiting the vehicle. Under the guise of providing protection to police officers, this decision greatly expands the power of an arresting officer to search the private property of the arrestee and creates uncertainty on what constitutional limits apply to searches incident to arrest outside the home.

A Meaningful Criminal Justice System For The Future—An English Perspective, Baroness Scotland Of Asthal Qc

Mercer Law Review

The Fourth Annual John E. James Distinguished Lecture
Walter F. George School of Law
Mercer University
Macon, Georgia, September 21, 2004

Death Penalty Law, Holly Geerdes, David Lawless

Mercer Law Review

This Article surveys the death penalty decisions of the Georgia Supreme Court from June 1, 2003, through May 31, 2004. The cases discussed include those heard by the supreme court on interim appeal, on direct appeal, and on review of habeas corpus decisions. Focusing on the court's decisions that affect the trial and appeal of death penalty cases, this Article, with some exceptions, does not discuss holdings in capital cases that are common to all criminal appeals. Four United States Supreme Court decisions are included in this survey because of their salience to Georgia death penalty law.

A Deep Breath Before The Plunge: Undoing Miranda's Failure Before It's Too Late, Benjamin D. Cunningham

Mercer Law Review

The Supreme Court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona has been and will be a lightning rod for controversy so long as it remains in effect. The decision has been lauded for its apparent protection of individual dignity from overzealous police and criticized as an unwarranted shackle on legitimate law enforcement techniques. Nevertheless, Miranda has weathered the storms and, thanks to the Supreme Court's decision in Dickerson v. United States, has endured. Unknown to most proponents or detractors, however, Miranda has had little effect on what actually occurs during police interrogations. The reasons for this are varied. First, by creating …

Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Rosemary T. Cakmis

Mercer Law Review

Despite the passage of almost two decades since the enactment of the United States Sentencing Guidelines ("U.S.S.G."), issues relating to the sentencing guidelines continue to dominate Eleventh Circuit case law. This is no doubt due, at least in part, to the fact that by 2003, the guidelines had been amended 662 times.

Ambiguities within the guidelines regularly lead to differing interpretations of those guidelines among the circuit courts of appeals. These differing interpretations result in further guideline amendments aimed at reconciling the splits among the circuits. The amended guidelines result in new issues of first impression, new interpretations, and new …

Criminal Procedure, Charles E. Cox Jr.

Mercer Law Review

Each year the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issues numerous decisions concerning the protections provided to criminal defendants by the United States Constitution. This Article surveys decisions issued in 2003 that are likely to be of interest to criminal law practitioners.

Criminal Law And Criminal Procedure, John O. Cole, Bonnie K. Cole

Mercer Law Review

In reading over 900 cases in criminal law and criminal procedure during the survey period, the fact that courts find the time to carefully analyze the allegations of error in each case is striking. The difference in the quality of the courts' work is especially striking when compared to the courts of twenty years ago.

Several themes emerge after reading these cases. The first theme is the number of specious arguments raised on appeal. This is due, in large part, to the Georgia Supreme Court's opinion in Huguley v. State in which the court disapproved Anders motions and forced attorneys …

Death Penalty Law, Michael Mears, Holly Geerdes

Mercer Law Review

This Article surveys the death penalty decisions of the Georgia Supreme Court from June 1, 2002 through May 31, 2003.' The cases discussed include those heard by the supreme court on interim appeal, on direct appeal, and on review of habeas corpus decisions. Focusing on the court's decisions that affect the trial and appeal of death penalty cases, this Article, with some exceptions, does not discuss holdings in capital cases that are common to all criminal appeals. Four recent decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States are included

Constitutional Criminal Procedure, James P. Fleissner, Sarah B. Mabery, Jeanne L. Wiggins

Mercer Law Review

This Article surveys noteworthy 2000 decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in the field commonly known as Constitutional Criminal Procedure. As in past years, the survey focuses on significant decisions concerning the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures; the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination, prohibition against double jeopardy, and guarantees of due process and grand jury screening; and the Sixth Amendment's procedural protections, including the right to counsel and the right of confrontation. Of course, most of these rights, with few exceptions, such as the right to have charges approved by a …

Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Rosemary T. Cakmis, James T. Skuthan

Mercer Law Review

Compared to the previous two years, the Eleventh Circuit issued relatively few published opinions relating to the United States Sentencing Guidelines ("U.S.S.G.") during 2000. This decline could be the result of fewer guidelines cases being presented to the Eleventh Circuit or more guideline cases being disposed of in unpublished opinions. An equally likely explanation, however, may be that the court has been inundated with cases involving the application of the landmark United States Supreme Court decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey. Courts across the nation have been grappling with the ripple effects of the potentially far reaching applications of …

Apprendi V. New Jersey: Should Any Factual Determination Authorizing An Increase In A Criminal Defendant's Sentence Be Proven To A Jury Beyond A Reasonable Doubt, Jason Ferguson

Mercer Law Review

In Apprendi v. New Jersey, the United States Supreme Court held, with the exception of the fact of prior criminal convictions, that any factual determination that authorizes an increased sentence beyond the statutory maximum must be proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Inherent Constitutionality Of The Police Use Of Deadly Force To Stop Dangerous Pursuits, Michael Douglas Owens

Mercer Law Review

Every day in our country, police agencies pursue criminal suspects who are unlawfully attempling to elude them. Reality-based television shows, such as Cops and the Police Videos series on the Fox Network, bring home to the public some measure of the adrenaline-producing excitement that automobile pursuits engender. Rarely, however, does one see the tragedy that often results from these pursuits. While reliable nationwide statistics on police pursuits are not available, various studies depict the rate of accidents as ranging from twenty-nine percent to seventy percent, with a rate of injury ranging from eleven percent to twenty-seven percent. Injuries and deaths …

Garner V. Jones: Restricting Prisoners' Ex Post Facto Challenges To Changes In Parole Systems, Robert A. Renjel

Mercer Law Review

In Garner v. Jones, the United States Supreme Court laid out rules for lower courts to determine whether granting parole boards the discretion to change retroactively the frequency of parole reconsideration hearings would violate the Ex Post Facto Clause. The Court held that a prisoner challenging one of these statutes must produce certain evidence that the statute "created a significant risk of increasing his punishment."

Ohler V. United States: Defendants Waive Appellate Review By Reducing The Sting Of Prior Conviction Impeachment Evidence, Misty Dawn Garrett

Mercer Law Review

In Ohler v. United States, the United States Supreme Court adopted a per se waiver rule holding that a defendant waives the right to appeal an in limine ruling permitting the government to impeach the defendant with evidence of a prior conviction when the defendant introduced the evidence on direct examination in an effort to reduce the sting of the evidence.

Carruthers V. State: Thou Shalt Not Make Direct Religious References In Closing Argument, Marcus S. Henson

Mercer Law Review

In Carruthers v. State, the Georgia Supreme Court addressed the very "precise line" that must be drawn between religious references that are permissible and those that must not be allowed in the sentencing phase of capital cases. Specifically, the court held that the prosecutor's use of direct quotations from the Bible "invoked a higher moral authority and diverted the jury from the discretion provided to them under state law." The court ultimately found that the allowance of these direct religious references, over the objection of defense counsel, constituted an impermissible violation of defendant's right to due process.

Georgia Death Penalty Law, Mike Mears, Ken Driggs

Mercer Law Review

This Article covers death penalty decisions from the Georgia Supreme Court for the period from January 1, 1999 to May 31, 2000. It primarily discusses direct appeal decisions but reaches cases in a few other settings as well. This Article does not discuss holdings in capital cases that are common to all criminal appeals but is limited to death penalty law. Recent developments in Georgia death penalty law are considered in the order they would appear in a capital trial. In the period covered by this Article, the Georgia Supreme Court considered thirteen death sentences imposed in superior courts following …

Lilly V. Virginia: Answering The Williamson Question—Is The Statement Against Penal Interest Exception "Firmly Rooted" Under Confrontation Clause Analysis?, Kim Mark Minix

Mercer Law Review

In Lilly v. Virginia the United States Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle that the statement against penal interest exception to the hearsay rule is too large a class for effective Confrontation Clause analysis. However, the Court held that confessional statements made by an accomplice that incriminate a criminal defendant, a subcategory of this exception, are not within a "firmly rooted" exception as recognized under the Confrontation Clause.