Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Deaf In Prison: The Courts' Failure To Remedy Ada Violations In Prisons, Ruby Grossman

Washington Law Review

The carceral system is one of the many institutions that fails to adequately accommodate individuals with disabilities. D/deaf individuals specifically face a severe lack of resources and accommodations, pervasive mistreatment, and inadequate services while incarcerated. While the Supreme Court has recognized that individuals necessarily do not retain all their constitutional rights while incarcerated, there are constitutional rights and statutory protections with which prisons are required to comply. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is one such statute. When it comes to D/deaf incarcerated individuals, the ADA requires that prisons provide reasonable accommodations so those individuals are not deprived of programs, …

Shielding Freedoms: State Noncooperation In Hunts For Evidence And People, Mary D. Fan

Washington Law Review

The nation is fracturing into a patchwork of rights and punishment. What some states and localities safeguard as rights, other jurisdictions are criminalizing and punishing. As the divides in rights and punishment deepen, some states are becoming sanctuaries for freedoms penalized elsewhere and enacting shield laws prohibiting cooperation with criminalization and punishment states. A prime example is shield laws protecting people seeking to exercise reproductive rights or obtain gender-affirming care. Major jurisdictions for healthcare and technology-related businesses, such as Washington, California, New York, and Massachusetts, have enacted shield laws that prohibit law enforcement and companies from complying with subpoenas seeking …

Another Broken Promise: The Mmiwg2s Crisis And The Violation Of The Federal Indian Trust Obligation, Marley Forest

Washington Law Review

Indigenous Women, Girls, and Two-Spirit people go missing and are murdered at rates nearly ten times the national average in the United States. This disproportionate epidemic of violence has been labeled the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls, and Two-Spirit (MMIWG2S) crisis. Several factors exacerbate this crisis. First, European colonizers used violence against Native people, especially women and Two-Spirit people, as a tactic of control and domination since first contact in the 1600s. Second, nearly two hundred years of legislative actions and case law have effectively stripped Native Nations of all criminal jurisdictional power over crimes committed on their land …

The Objective Observer: The Washington State Supreme Court's Remedial Aspirations And Experience On The Ground, David B. Owens

Washington Law Review

The Washington State Supreme Court has adopted an “objective observer rule” for addressing whether race impacted jury selection and extended this rule to evaluating all aspects of Washington courts, including jury trials. The objective observer rule allows courts to evaluate whether decisions in those courtrooms could be viewed as the result of racial bias, even where there is no evidence of specific racial animus and in the absence of racial slurs. The rule, which covers a form of disparate impact, has now existed for over half a decade. This Article outlines the Washington State Supreme Court’s development of the objective …

"A Man’S Home Is His Castle"? Intimate Partner Violence, Firearm Surrender, And Home Searches Under Article I, Section 7 Of The Washington Constitution, Dana Raigrodski

Washington Law Review

Intimate partner violence (IPV) remains a vexing problem in Washington. Firearms make intimate partner violence much more dangerous and, frequently, deadly. To protect victims of IPV and to reduce its severity when guns are present, the State of Washington put in place a comprehensive statutory scheme to disarm perpetrators of IPV. In 2022, however, the Washington Court of Appeals for Division II held, in State v. Flannery, that the statutory firearm surrender scheme violates article I, section 7 of the Washington Constitution, which prohibits disturbing a person’s private affairs or invading their home without authority of law. This Article …

Growing Pains: The Evolution Of Jlwop Sentences In Washington, Selena M. Galvan

Washington Law Review

In 2021, the Washington State Supreme Court abolished de facto life sentences— those that amount to a life sentence despite not carrying the life without parole label—for juvenile offenders, finding them unconstitutional under article 1, section 14 of the Washington Constitution. In 2022, less than a year later, the Court reversed course in the case of State v. Anderson by upholding a sixty-one-year sentence for crimes a juvenile offender committed at age seventeen. The Washington State Supreme Court’s decision in Anderson runs contrary to what modern science demonstrates about the diminished culpability of juvenile offenders, and it runs contrary to …

Rethinking Article I, Section 9: State Protections Against Self-Incrimination In The Wake Of Gr 37, Zachary L. Hentzel

Washington Law Review

When adopted by Washington courts in 2018, General Rule 37 marked a significant advance in the fight against racial discrimination. Modifying the third step of Batson v. Kentucky, GR 37 requires that peremptory challenges must be denied if an “objective observer” could view race or ethnicity as a factor in the strike. Applying the objective observer standard to contexts beyond jury selection—such as evaluation of jury verdicts, seizures of persons, and prosecutorial misconduct—has led to major statewide victories toward establishing a more equitable justice system. However, courts have not granted all requests to extend the objective observer standard to …

Brief Of Criminal Law Professors Andrea Roth And J.D. King As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Lesh V. United States, U.S. Supreme Court Docket No. 24-654, David B. Owens

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED

Article III of the Constitution provides that “[t]he Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury.” And the Sixth Amendment provides that “[i]n all criminal prosecutions,” the accused shall enjoy the right to trial by jury.

The question presented is: Whether the Constitution’s dual guarantee of trial by jury contains an unstated exception for “petty” offenses.

Curb Their Enthusiasm: Controlling The Discretion Of Creative Prosecutors, Scott Schumacher

Articles

On January 6, 2021, a mob of supporters of then-president Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol Building to disrupt the certification by Congress of the presidential election. Joseph Fischer was a member of that mob, and he was one of the individuals who forced his way into the Capitol Building. He was charged with multiple criminal counts, including obstruction of an official proceeding, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c) for allegedly attempting to delay Congress’ election certification. In Fischer v. United States, the United States Supreme Court reversed the obstruction charge, holding that section 1512(c) did not apply to …

The Obvious Violation Exception To Qualified Immunity: An Empirical Study, Bailey D. Barnes

Washington Law Review

Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil suits for discretionary actions, as long as the violated right is not clearly established. A right is deemed established when every reasonable official would understand it based on precedent, placing it beyond debate, such that only the plainly incompetent may be held liable. Consequently, even when an act infringes on one’s civil rights, a court may deny relief owing to a lack of factually comparable precedent. However, in 2020, the Supreme Court indicated its distrust for overreliance on precedent in certain contexts. In Taylor v. Riojas, the Court held that prison officials …

Big Data Searches And The Future Of Criminal Procedure, Mary Fan

Articles

This Article proceeds in three parts. Part I illuminates the nostalgic Luddism that influences Fourth Amendment jurisprudence and the challenges posed by evolving technologies to this dominant lens. This Part explains the operation of geofence and keyword warrants and how their power to crack cold cases by unidentified perpetrators both tempt and terrify. The confusion in the courts over the constitutionality of geofence and keyword warrants is emblematic of the larger challenges of the Romantic Luddism in Fourth Amendment originalism that has grown in influence over the decades.

Part II frames and theorizes the concepts of collateral impact and collateral …

Consent Searches As Police Violence, David B. Owens

Articles

Henderson and Krishnamurthi’s new paper—A Wolf in Sheep’s Attire: How Consent Enfeebles Our Fourth Amendment (hereinafter Sheep’s Attire)— powerfully advocates for reform to the consent doctrine. The paper is thoughtful, well-intentioned, and useful for challenging core assumptions about the law to help us evaluate how it should work. The piece is also fun to read as the authors breathe real-world insight into old doctrine. In the end, though the article flirts with a categorical rule about consent searches, and while the authors “think it categorically unreasonable for police to ask individuals to forgo their rights” in the context …

Brief Of Fourth Amendment Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Defendant-Appellant On The Good Faith Exception Issue, U.S. V. Holcomb, Ninth Circuit Court Of Appeals Docket No. 23-469, David B. Owens, Rachel Nowlin-Sohl, Averill L. Aubrey, Megan Haygood, Kayleigh Mcniel, Michael C. Orehek

Court Briefs

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

When the Fourth Amendment is violated by an unconstitutional search, the suppression of wrongfully obtained evidence (the exclusionary rule) is often the only viable remedy that might deter government overreach and provide some redress for the constitutional violation. Though the Supreme Court has long treated remedial mechanisms as separate from their underlying rights, Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 (1949), and while limited exceptions to the suppression requirement have existed for years, recent expansion of the “good faith exception” in the digital age imposes unprecedented threats to privacy and security.

A porous or expansive view …

After The Criminal Justice System, Benjamin Levin

Washington Law Review

Since the 1960s, the “criminal justice system” has operated as the common label for a vast web of actors and institutions. But as critiques of mass incarceration have entered the mainstream, academics, activists, and advocates increasingly have stopped referring to the “criminal justice system.” Instead, they have opted for critical labels—the “criminal legal system,” the “criminal punishment system,” the “prison industrial complex,” and so on. What does this re-labeling accomplish? Does this change in language matter to broader efforts at criminal justice reform or abolition? Or does an emphasis on labels and language distract from substantive engagement with the injustices …

No Sense Of Decency, Kathryn E. Miller

Washington Law Review

For nearly seventy years, the Court has assessed Eighth Amendment claims by evaluating “the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.” In this Article, I examine the evolving standards of decency test, which has long been a punching bag for critics on both the right and the left. Criticism of the doctrine has been fierce but largely academic until recent years. Some fault the test for being too majoritarian, while others argue that it provides few constraints on the Justices’ discretion, permitting their personal predilections to rule the day. For many, the test is seen …

The Long Road To Justice: Why State Courts Should Lower The Evidentiary Burden For Proving Racialized Traffic Stops And Adopt The Exclusionary Rule As A Remedy For Equal Protection Violations, Abby M. Fink

Washington Journal of Social & Environmental Justice

Racist and brutal policing continues to pervade the criminal legal system. Black and brown people who interact with the police consistently face unequal targeting and treatment. Routine traffic stops are especially dangerous and harmful and can lead to death. Under Whren, a police officer’s racist motivations or implicit bias towards a driver do not influence the constitutionality of a traffic stop. An officer only needs to show there was probable cause to believe a traffic stop occurred. Although the unconstitutionality of pre-textual traffic stops has been widely explored since Whren, both federal and state courts have struggled to find legal …

Coming Of Age In The Eyes Of The Law: Theconflict Between Miranda, J.D.B., And Puberty, David M. N. Garavito

Articles

Everyone knows that going through puberty is associated with a multitude of changes: physical, mental, hormonal, etc. Fewer people know that when and how fast one goes through puberty can also be associated with changes to one’s legal rights. The Supreme Court of the United States held, in the landmark case of J.D.B. v. North Carolina, that there were many “commonsense conclusions” that could be drawn from how a child’s age would affect their interactions with law enforcement. In that case, the Court was deciding whether age should affect whether a child was considered “in custody” of the police, granting …

The Dignitary Confrontation Clause, Erin Sheley

Washington Law Review

For seventeen years, the Supreme Court’s Confrontation Clause jurisprudence has been confused and confusing. In Crawford v. Washington (2004), the Court overruled prior precedent and held that “testimonial” out-of-court statements could not be admitted at trial unless the defendant had an opportunity to cross-examine the declarant, even when the statement would be otherwise admissible as particularly reliable under an exception to the rule against hearsay. In a series of contradictory opinions over the next several years, the Court proceeded to expand and then seemingly roll back this holding, leading to widespread chaos in common types of cases, particularly those involving …

Race And Washington’S Criminal Justice System: 2021 Report To The Washington Supreme Court, Task Force 2.0

Washington Law Review

RACE & WASHINGTON’S CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM:

EDITOR’S NOTE

As Editors-in-Chief of the Washington Law Review, Gonzaga Law Review, and Seattle University Law Review, we represent the flagship legal academic publications of each law school in Washington State. Our publications last joined together to publish the findings of the first Task Force on Race and the Criminal Justice System in 2011/12. A decade later, we are honored to join once again to present the findings of Task Force 2.0. Law journals have enabled generations of legal professionals to introduce, vet, and distribute new ideas, critiques of existing legal structures, and reflections …

The Finality Of Unmodified Appellate Commissioner Rulings In Washington State, Aurora R. Bearse

Washington Law Review Online

In Washington appellate courts, unelected court commissioners handle most of the motion practice. Some motions are minor and mostly procedural, but other motions touch on the scope of the appeal or its merits. Because commissioners have the power to shape the course of an appeal, the Washington Rules of Appellate Procedure allow parties to internally appeal any commissioner decision to a panel of elected judges, via what is called a “motion to modify” under RAP 17.7. If a panel modifies a commissioner’s ruling, the panel’s decision becomes the final decision of the court on that issue. Similarly, multiple opinions recognize …

Due Process In Prison Disciplinary Hearings: How The “Some Evidence” Standard Of Proof Violates The Constitution, Emily Parker

Washington Law Review

Prison disciplinary hearings have wide-reaching impacts on an incarcerated individual’s liberty. A sanction following a guilty finding is a consequence that stems from hearings and goes beyond mere punishment. Guilty findings for serious infractions, like a positive result on a drug test, can often result in a substantial increase in prison time. Before the government deprives an incarcerated individual of their liberty interest in a shorter sentence, it must provide minimum due process. However, an individual can be found guilty of serious infractions in Washington State prison disciplinary hearings under the “some evidence” standard of proof—a standard that allows for …

Revocation And Retribution, Jacob Schuman

Washington Law Review

Revocation of community supervision is a defining feature of American criminal law. Nearly 4.5 million people in the United States are on parole, probation, or supervised release, and 1/3 eventually have their supervision revoked, sending 350,000 to prison each year. Academics, activists, and attorneys warn that “mass supervision” has become a powerful engine of mass incarceration.

This is the first Article to study theories of punishment in revocation of community supervision, focusing on the federal system of supervised release. Federal courts apply a primarily retributive theory of revocation, aiming to sanction defendants for their “breach of trust.” However, the structure, …

"Send Freedom House!": A Study In Police Abolition, Tiffany Yang

Washington Law Review

Sparked by the police killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, the 2020 uprisings accelerated a momentum of abolitionist organizing that demands the defunding and dismantling of policing infrastructures. Although a growing body of legal scholarship recognizes abolitionist frameworks when examining conventional proposals for reform, critics mistakenly continue to disregard police abolition as an unrealistic solution. This Essay helps dispel this myth of “impracticality” and illustrates the pragmatism of abolition by identifying a community-driven effort that achieved a meaningful reduction in policing we now take for granted. I detail the history of the Freedom House Ambulance Service, a Black civilian …

Police Or Pirates? Reforming Washington's Civil Asset Forfeiture System, Jasmin Chigbrow

Washington Law Review

Civil asset forfeiture laws permit police officers to seize property they suspect is connected to criminal activity and sell or retain the property for the police department’s use. In many states, including Washington, civil forfeiture occurs independent of any criminal case—many property owners are never charged with the offense police allege occurred. Because the government is not required to file criminal charges, property owners facing civil forfeiture lack the constitutional safeguards normally guaranteed to defendants in the criminal justice system: the right to an attorney, the presumption of innocence, the government’s burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, …

"Benevolent Paternalism" Revisited, Daniel H. Foote

Articles

Nearly thirty years ago, in an article entitled “The Benevolent Paternalism of Japanese Criminal Justice” (Benevolent Paternalism), I sought to set out a model for the Japanese criminal justice system, the “benevolent paternalism” model. As the label reflects, I viewed the Japanese criminal justice system as consisting of two sides, a “paternalistic” side and a “benevolent” side. This essay begins with a short summary of the model; it then turns to an examination of major developments in the intervening three decades and considers whether the model remains relevant today.

Talking Back In Court, M. Eve Hanan

Washington Law Review

People charged with crimes often speak directly to the judge presiding over their case. Yet, what can be seen in courtrooms across the U.S. is that defendants rarely “talk back” in court, meaning that they rarely challenge authority’s view of the law, the crime, the defendant, the court’s procedure, or the fairness of the proposed sentence.

With few exceptions, legal scholars have treated the occasions when defendants speak directly to the court as a problem to be solved by appointing more lawyers and better lawyers. While effective representation is crucial, this Article starts from the premise that defendants have important …

Benevolent Exclusion, Anna Offit

Washington Law Review

The American jury system holds the promise of bringing common sense ideas about justice to the enforcement of the law. But its democratizing effect cannot be realized if a segment of the population faces systematic exclusion based on income or wealth. The problem of unequal access to jury service based on socio-economic disparities is a longstanding yet under-studied problem—and one which the uneven fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic only exacerbated. Like race- and sex-based jury discrimination during the peremptory challenge phase of jury selection, the routine dismissal of citizens who face economic hardship excludes not only people but also the …

Awakening The American Jury: Did The Killing Of George Floyd Alter Juror Deliberations Forever?, Tamara F. Lawson

Articles

In the summer of 2020, the witnessing of George Floyd's death triggered an outpouring of public expression far beyond other cases in modern times. While the experience led some to advocate for reform and participate in antiracism rallies, marches, and campaigns, it also forced many others into internal reflection, awareness, and awakening to the knowledge of a lived experience with police different from their own. The gruesome realities of the video were irreconcilable with those prior beliefs and did not comport with any moral or legal standards of dignity. Prior to witnessing George Floyd's death on video at the hands …

Suspects, Cars & Police Dogs: A Complicated Relationship, Brian R. Gallini

Washington Law Review

Officers are searching and arresting vehicle occupants without a warrant with increasing regularity. For justification, this Article demonstrates, lower courts across the country unconstitutionally expand the scope of the Fourth Amendment’s automobile exception—often in the context of a positive dog alert. But Supreme Court jurisprudence specifically limits the scope of the automobile exception to warrantless searches of cars and their containers. In other words, the probable cause underlying the automobile exception allows police to search a vehicle and its containers—nothing more.

Despite that clear guidance, this Article argues that a growing number of lower courts nationwide unconstitutionally rely on the …

Ring, Amazon Calling: The State Action Doctrine & The Fourth Amendment, Grace Egger

Washington Law Review Online

Video doorbells have proliferated across the United States and Amazon owns one of the most popular video doorbell companies on the market—Ring. While many view the Ring video doorbell as useful technology that protects the home and promotes safer neighborhoods, the product reduces consumer privacy without much recourse. For example, Ring partners with cities and law enforcement agencies across the United States thereby creating a mass surveillance network in which law enforcement agencies can watch neighborhoods and access Ring data without the user’s knowledge or consent. Because Amazon is not a state actor, it is able to circumvent the due …