Criminal Procedure Commons^™

When The Icc Comes Knocking, The United States Should Welcome It With Open Arms, Brittney A. Dimond

Washington International Law Journal

The Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court requested approval to open a formal investigation into war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly committed in Afghanistan since May 2003. If the investigation is approved, the United States will have significant implications not only for relations going forward between the United States and the ICC, but also for the international communities' understanding of the Court's jurisdiction.Three of the United States' likely response options based on its past and current relationshipo with the ICC include: (1) declining to cooperate with the ICC based on a denial of jurisdiction due to …

Danger Ahead: Risk Assessment And The Future Of Bail Reform, John Logan Koepke, David G. Robinson

Washington Law Review

In the last five years, legislators in all fifty states have made changes to their pretrial justice systems. Reform efforts aim to shrink jails by incarcerating fewer people—particularly poor, low-risk defendants and racial minorities. Many jurisdictions are embracing pretrial risk assessment instruments—statistical tools that use historical data to forecast which defendants can safely be released—as a centerpiece of reform. Now, many are questioning the extent to which pretrial risk assessment instruments actually serve reform goals. Existing scholarship and debate centers on how the instruments themselves may reinforce racial disparities and on how their opaque algorithms may frustrate due process interests. …

Remaining Silent In Indian Country: Self-Incrimination And Grants Of Immunity For Tribal Court Defendants, Philipp C. Kunze

Washington Law Review

A defendant in state and federal courts is entitled to a constitutional protection against self-incrimination. The Fifth Amendment establishes this privilege, which can only be overcome through a voluntary waiver or by the granting of an appropriate level of immunity. Those grants of immunity were made mutually binding on the state and federal governments in Kastigar v. United States and Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor. However, in Talton v. Mayes, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments do not limit the conduct of the more than 560 federally recognized Indian tribes …

Contesting Police Credibility, Rachel Moran

Washington Law Review

Criminal cases often amount to credibility contests between two actors: the complainant, testifying for the government, and the defendant. In theory, the defendant’s opportunity to attack the credibility of government witnesses should be equal to or greater than the government’s opportunity to attack the credibility of the defendant, given that the defendant has a constitutional right to a fair trial. But when the government’s witnesses are police officers, the converse occurs. Although the phenomenon of police officers lying at trial is so well documented that it has its own euphemism, “testilying,” the law imposes tremendous obstacles to defense counsel obtaining …

Incentivized Informants, Brady, Ruiz, And Wrongful Imprisonment: Requiring Pre-Plea Disclosure Of Material Exculpatory Evidence, Markus Surratt

Washington Law Review

An incentivized informant scandal recently hit Orange County, California where county officials were caught lying, hiding, and not providing information about their informants. Concerned citizens, attorneys, and scholars are beginning to ask more questions as these stories receive increased nationwide attention: what should we do about false incentivized informant testimony? What can we do? Under Brady, Giglio, Ruiz, and their progeny, in criminal cases the government must turn over any material exculpatory evidence that it possesses, or that is available, when the defendant decides to go to trial. However, if the government does not know—or purports not …

The "Time Of Arrest" Rule: How The Washington State Supreme Court Untethered Its Search Incident To Arrest Jurisprudence From The Exception's Underlying Rationales, Laura Zanzig-Wong

Washington Law Review Online

The search incident to arrest exception is based on two exigencies: officer safety and evidence preservation. In searches incident to arrest of an arrestee’s person, these exigencies are presumed. Recently, the Washington State Supreme Court extended this presumption to all items carried by an arrestee at the time of arrest, regardless of whether the arrestee can access such items at the time of the search. I argue that this extension untethers the search incident to arrest doctrine from its underlying rationales and focuses too heavily on the practical issue of transporting an arrestee’s belongings to the station post-arrest. In doing …

The "Time Of Arrest" Rule: How The Washington State Supreme Court Untethered Its Search Incident To Arrest Jurisprudence From The Exception's Underlying Rationales, Laura Zanzig-Wong

Washington Law Review Online

The search incident to arrest exception is based on two exigencies: officer safety and evidence preservation. In searches incident to arrest of an arrestee’s person, these exigencies are presumed. Recently, the Washington State Supreme Court extended this presumption to all items carried by an arrestee at the time of arrest, regardless of whether the arrestee can access such items at the time of the search. I argue that this extension untethers the search incident to arrest doctrine from its underlying rationales and focuses too heavily on the practical issue of transporting an arrestee’s belongings to the station post-arrest. In doing …

Introduction Of Videotaping Of Interrogations And The Lessons Of The Imaichi Case: A Case Of Conventional Criminal Justice Policy-Making In Japan, Setsuo Miyazawa, Mari Hirayama

Washington International Law Journal

Malcolm M. Feeley examined cases of criminal justice reform in the United States, where reforms can be conceived and initiated in a very open structure, but implementation of the introduced reforms can be handed over to highly fragmented implementers. The story of mandatory videotaping of interrogations and accompanying changes in Japan demonstrates the reform process at the other end of the scale, where the members of the criminal justice establishment can exert a strong influence even at the conception and initiation stages, and have even stronger control at the implementation and routinization stages. We believe that Feeley’s theoretical framework can …

Criminal Court Reform In Taiwan: A Case Of Fragmented Reform In A Not-Fragmented Court System, Kai-Ping Su

Washington International Law Journal

This Article examines the character of Taiwan’s criminal court system and proposed court reforms. Taiwan’s criminal court is a not-fragmented system, distinct from the fragmented American criminal court. In fact, with hierarchical control in prosecutorial rulings and central administration of judicial decision-making, Taiwan’s criminal court system can be deemed a relatively centralized and bureaucratic organization. Given this context, when Taiwan’s criminal justice system disappoints the people, judges take the blame for the failures of the system. To resolve the serious problem of public distrust in judges and the court system, Taiwan’s government and the judicial authority make “responding to expectations …

South Africa's Dilemma: Immunity Laws, International Obligations, And The Visit By Sudan's President Omar Al Bashir, Ntombizozuko Dyani-Mhango

Washington International Law Journal

President Al Bashir has avoided the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) for seven years and has been able to travel to both states that are party to the Rome Statute and states that are not without any consequences. The existence of customary international law immunities makes it difficult for the ICC to be able to discharge its duties without the cooperation of states parties. The silence of the Security Council and its failure to clarify Security Council Resolution 1593 (2005) on whether the resolution indeed removes Sudan’s immunities in order for President Al Bashir to be arrested and surrendered to the …

Third Party Consent And Container Searches In The Home, Harlan Thomas Mechling

Washington Law Review

Circuit courts disagree as to whether law enforcement officers have a duty to inquire about a resident’s actual authority to consent to searches of ambiguous containers in a common area. Two circuit courts use the ambiguity approach and two circuit courts use the obviousness approach. The ambiguity approach articulated by the D.C. Circuit in United States v. Peyton provides protection for individuals’ rights while placing a minimal burden on law enforcement officers. In Peyton, the D.C. Circuit held that law enforcement officers have a duty to ask clarifying questions if ownership over a container is ambiguous. The ambiguity approach …

The Bright Line's Dark Side: Pre-Charge Attachment Of The Sixth Amendment Right To Counsel, Steven J. Mulroy

Washington Law Review

In this Article, Professor Mulroy discusses a current circuit split over whether the Sixth Amendment right to counsel can ever attach prior to a prosecutor filing a formal charge (i.e., an indictment or information). Relying on language in several Supreme Court opinions, some lower courts impose a bright-line rule stating that unless there has been such a formal charge (or unless the defendant has appeared before a judge), the right can never attach, in part because the Sixth Amendment’s text refers to a “criminal prosecution” and an “accused.” This rule can lead to harsh results—e.g., where a prosecutor takes advantage …

Justice Visualized: Courts And The Body Camera Revolution, Mary D. Fan

Articles

What really happened? For centuries, courts have been magisterially blind, cloistered far away from the contested events that they adjudicate, relying primarily on testimony to get the story—or competing stories. Whether oral or written, this testimony is profoundly human, with all the passions, partisanship and imperfections of human perception.

Now a revolution is coming. Across the nation, police departments are deploying body cameras. Analyzing body camera policies from police departments across the nation, the article reveals an unfolding future where much of the main staple events of criminal procedure law will be recorded. Much of the current focus is on …

The Antidemocratic Sixth Amendment, Janet Moore

Washington Law Review

Criminal procedure experts often claim that poor people have no Sixth Amendment right to choose their criminal defense lawyers. These experts insist that the Supreme Court has reserved the Sixth Amendment right to choose for the small minority of defendants who can afford to hire counsel. This Article upends that conventional wisdom with new doctrinal, theoretical, and practical arguments supporting a Sixth Amendment right to choose for all defendants, including the overwhelming majority who are indigent. The Article’s fresh case analysis shows the Supreme Court’s “no-choice” statements are dicta, which the Court’s own reasoning and rulings refute. The Article’s new …

Gross Error, Eric Berger

Washington Law Review

Glossip v. Gross epitomizes judicial deference gone berserk. In rejecting an Eighth Amendment challenge to Oklahoma’s lethal injection protocol, the United States Supreme Court rested its holding on several forms of deference. Closer examination demonstrates that each of these unsupported deference determinations was, at best, contestable and, at worst, simply wrong. Far from being anomalous, such under-theorized deference reflects more generally the Court’s willingness to utilize various stealth determinations to manipulate outcomes in constitutional cases. The understandable concern that frivolous lethal injection challenges will clog courts and delay executions likely motivated the Court’s approach. Remarkably, though, the Court did not …

Gross Error, Eric Berger

Washington Law Review

Glossip v. Gross epitomizes judicial deference gone berserk. In rejecting an Eighth Amendment challenge to Oklahoma’s lethal injection protocol, the United States Supreme Court rested its holding on several forms of deference. Closer examination demonstrates that each of these unsupported deference determinations was, at best, contestable and, at worst, simply wrong. Far from being anomalous, such under-theorized deference reflects more generally the Court’s willingness to utilize various stealth determinations to manipulate outcomes in constitutional cases. The understandable concern that frivolous lethal injection challenges will clog courts and delay executions likely motivated the Court’s approach. Remarkably, though, the Court did not …

Constitutional Retroactivity In Criminal Procedure, Dov Fox, Alex Stein

Washington Law Review

The “watershed” doctrine gives prisoners a constitutional basis to reopen their cases based on a new due process protection that would have made a difference had it been announced before their appeals were exhausted. The Supreme Court has imposed nearly impossible conditions, however, for any new rule of criminal procedure to apply retroactively to a final conviction or sentence. No such rule can be backdated unless it enhances not only the accuracy of criminal verdicts, but also “our very understanding of the bedrock” tenets of fairness in criminal trials. The Court refers to rules that satisfy both these requirements as …

Constitutional Retroactivity In Criminal Procedure, Dov Fox, Alex Stein

Washington Law Review

The “watershed” doctrine gives prisoners a constitutional basis to reopen their cases based on a new due process protection that would have made a difference had it been announced before their appeals were exhausted. The Supreme Court has imposed nearly impossible conditions, however, for any new rule of criminal procedure to apply retroactively to a final conviction or sentence. No such rule can be backdated unless it enhances not only the accuracy of criminal verdicts, but also “our very understanding of the bedrock” tenets of fairness in criminal trials. The Court refers to rules that satisfy both these requirements as …

"Does Oregon's Constitution Need A Due Process Clause?" Thoughts On Due Process And Other Limigations On State Action, Thomas A. Balmer

Washington Law Review Online

During a legislative hearing last year, an Oregon state senator asked, “Does Oregon’s Constitution need a due process clause?” That question raises fundamental issues of constitutional law and of the relationship between the federal and state constitutions. Can and should state courts rely primarily on federal constitutional principles, made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, in deciding critical questions about the rights of criminal defendants, freedom of speech and religion, and equal protection? Or should state courts focus on their own constitutions—state due process, equal privileges and immunities, and similar “great ordinances” or more specific …

Trial By One's Peers: The Need To Expand Japan's Lay Judge System, Harrison L.E. Owens

Washington International Law Journal

As a civil law-based country, Japan’s legal system has historically placed a strong emphasis on the formalistic application of code provisions to cases by professional judges without a jury. Within the criminal justice system, prosecutors have played a highly significant role in all cases. They exclusively make the decision to indict an alleged criminal, conduct investigation of crimes, initiate a criminal case, and they also control and supervise enforcement of a conviction. In addition, the Prosecutors Office of Japan has historically emphasized the need to obtain a high rate of convictions to maintain the Japanese public’s trust in, and high …

The Risks Of Clouded Property Title For Cannabis Business Owners, Investors, And Creditors, Sean M. O'Connor, Jason Liu

Articles

This Article provides a brief primer on the surprising range of assets that the Controlled Substances Act forfeiture provisions govern for the state-legal cannabis businesses. It outlines these provisions for tangible as well as intangible property, with an emphasis on risks to state-legal cannabis businesses’ intellectual property and issued securities.

We argue that these forfeiture risks create clouded title for all subject tangible and intangible property—not only for the state-legal businesses and their proprietors, but also for those businesses’ outside investors, creditors, and suppliers/contractors.

The Immortal Accusation, Lindsey Webb

Washington Law Review

In the American criminal justice system, accusations have eternal life. Prosecutors, judges, and prison officials regularly consider dismissed charges and even prior acquittals in the defendant’s criminal history when making decisions ranging from the filing of charges to the imposition of punishment. This Article argues that the criminal justice system’s reliance on “accusation evidence” should be understood as furthering that system’s larger allegiance to attaining and preserving findings of guilt. Once the government obtains a guilty plea or verdict, appellate courts rarely overturn convictions based on concerns about the accuracy of the conviction; indeed, post-conviction review procedures often are structured …

State V. Crumpton: How The Washington State Supreme Court Improved Access To Justice In Post-Conviction Dna Testing, Jordan Mccrite

Washington Law Review

Post-conviction DNA testing is a valuable tool for ensuring innocent people are not wrongfully incarcerated. Society has strong interests in confirming that available, yet previously untested, DNA evidence matches the person convicted. Access to post-conviction DNA testing, however, has been limited to maintain finality and avoid an over-burdened court system. This Note examines post-conviction DNA testing in Washington State, particularly after the 2014 Washington State Supreme Court decision, State v. Crumpton. In Crumpton, a majority of the Court—over a strongly worded dissent—read a favorable presumption into Washington’s post-conviction DNA testing statute. The favorable presumption requires courts to presume …

Religious Objections To The Death Penalty After Hobby Lobby, Danieli Evans

Articles

In Glossip v. Gross, the Supreme Court held that in order to prevail on the claim that a method of execution is cruel and unusual punishment, petitioners must prove that there is an available alternative that entails a lesser risk of pain. In this case, the state was using a method that is allegedly more painful than drugs used in the past because manufacturers of the preferable drugs objected to selling them for the purpose of executions. These manufacturers are not alone in their desire to boycott the death penalty. Many religious groups have declared opposition to the death …

Patching Old Wineskins: Heightened Deference Towards Saiban-In Findings Of Fact On Koso Appeals Is Not Enough, Caleb Jon F. Vandenbos

Washington International Law Journal

The successful introduction of the saiban-in seido—the Japanese lay assessor system—was a tremendous step towards creating meaningful exchange between the public and the judiciary and democratizing the criminal justice system in Japan. To preserve the quality of this exchange, judges must conscientiously solicit and respect lay assessor input during deliberations, and saiban-in decisions must retain their force on appeal. Under current appellate procedure, however, saiban-in findings of fact may be replaced on koso appeal. Koso appeals threaten to eviscerate lay participants’ contributions in the individual case being reviewed and, in the long term, will discourage judges from taking lay …

A Tale Of Three Prejudices: Restructuring The "Martinez Gateway", Michael Ellis

Washington Law Review

Martinez v. Ryan opened a door previously closed to federal habeas petitioners. In the past, where attorney negligence or a pro se defendant’s lack of legal knowledge caused ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claims to be procedurally defaulted, those claims were likely lost forever. Now, following Martinez, petitioners get a second chance should they satisfy the Supreme Court’s four-pronged test. The Martinez test, however, is not a simple one. This Comment addresses some problems concerning the four-pronged test, including multiple and conflicting standards for the same element, tensions between Martinez and the underlying Strickland v. Washington ineffective-assistance-of-counsel standard, and confusion where the same …

Experimental Execution, Seema K. Shah

Washington Law Review

On July 23, 2014, an execution in Arizona lasted nearly two hours, with the inmate struggling to breathe and gasping over 600 times, according to a local reporter witnessing the execution. This was the third example of a botched execution in seven months. The Supreme Court last evaluated the constitutionality of execution by lethal injection in 2008, but did not provide a clear standard for evaluating risks. Since that time, the lethal injection landscape has transformed. States are using entirely new drugs and drug combinations, and sometimes obtain these drugs from questionable sources, making it hard to predict what will …

The Two-Sided Speedy Trial Problem, Brooks Holland

Washington Law Review Online

This article is a response to Shon Hopwood, https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol89/iss3/3/">The Not So Speedy Trial Act, 89 Wash. L. Rev. 709 (2014).

On The Argument That Execution Protocol Reform Is Biomedical Research, Paul Litton

Washington Law Review Online

This piece is a response to Seema K. Shah, Experimental Execution, 90 Wash. L. Rev.147.

Miller'S Promise: Re-Evaluating Extreme Criminal Sentences For Children, Nick Straley

Washington Law Review

Scientific, legal, and societal notions about youth have come together to reaffirm an age-old concept—children are different and they change as they grow older. In recent decisions, the United States Supreme Court has required courts and legislatures to take a new look at extreme criminal sentences imposed upon children. Life without parole sentences and decades-long, determinate sentences are constitutionally suspect when applied to children because they fail to adequately account for the dynamism of youth. Miller v. Alabama and Graham v. Florida announced two important principles: (1) that an extreme sentence can only be imposed upon a child following an …