Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Criminal Procedure Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Seattle University Law Review

Articles 211 - 224 of 224

Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure

Evading Miller, Robert S. Chang, David A. Perez, Luke M. Rona, Christopher M. Schafbuch Nov 2015

Evading Miller, Robert S. Chang, David A. Perez, Luke M. Rona, Christopher M. Schafbuch

Seattle University Law Review

Miller v. Alabama appeared to strengthen constitutional protections for juvenile sentencing that the United States Supreme Court recognized in Roper v. Simmons and Graham v. Florida. In Roper, the Court held that executing a person for a crime committed as a juvenile is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment. In Graham, the Court held that sentencing a person to life without parole for a nonhomicide offense committed as a juvenile is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment. In Miller, the Court held that a mandatory sentence of life without parole for a homicide offense committed by a juvenile is also unconstitutional under …

Go to article

The Confusing Standards For Discretionary Review In Washington And A Proposed Framework For Clarity, Judge Stephen Dwyer Oct 2014

The Confusing Standards For Discretionary Review In Washington And A Proposed Framework For Clarity, Judge Stephen Dwyer

Seattle University Law Review

It has now been more than thirty-five years since the Washington Rules of Appellate Procedure (RAP) became effective in 1976 and replaced all prior rules governing appellate procedure. One significant change that those rules made was to clearly describe and delineate a procedural mechanism for seeking interlocutory review of trial court decisions. The ultimate effect on practitioners is both obvious and unavoidable. Many lawyers, rather than stake out a clear position regarding the applicability of the various considerations governing discretionary review, simply argue that any and every consideration that is even arguably applicable is satisfied by the trial court’s determination. …

Go to article

A Deal Is A Deal: Plea Bargains And Double Jeopardy After Ohio V. Johnson, Philip Chinn Nov 2013

A Deal Is A Deal: Plea Bargains And Double Jeopardy After Ohio V. Johnson, Philip Chinn

Seattle University Law Review

The Double Jeopardy Clause provides that no person will “be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.” On March 10, 2004, Pedro Cabrera made a statement that cost him fourteen years of his life: he proclaimed his innocence. The court accepted this plea and ordered a finding of guilty with a recommended sentence of six years. However, during an exchange that followed, Mr. Cabrera asserted that he was actually innocent but that he preferred “to take the time” instead of proceeding to trial. The judge then refused to accept Mr. Cabrera’s guilty …

Go to article

The Voice Of Reason—Why Recent Judicial Interpretations Of The Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act’S Restrictions On Habeas Corpus Are Wrong, Judith L. Ritter Nov 2013

The Voice Of Reason—Why Recent Judicial Interpretations Of The Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act’S Restrictions On Habeas Corpus Are Wrong, Judith L. Ritter

Seattle University Law Review

By filing a petition for a federal writ of habeas corpus, a prisoner initiates a legal proceeding collateral to the direct appeals process. Federal statutes set forth the procedure and parameters of habeas corpus review. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) first signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, included significant cut-backs in the availability of federal writs of habeas corpus. This was by congressional design. Yet, despite the dire predictions, for most of the first decade of AEDPA’s reign, the door to habeas relief remained open. More recently, however, the Supreme Court reinterpreted a key portion …

Go to article

Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens Jul 2013

Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens

Seattle University Law Review

This survey is intended to serve as a resource to which Washington lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, and others can turn as an authoritative starting point for researching Washington search and seizure law. In order to be useful as a research tool, this Survey requires periodic updates to address new cases interpreting the Washington constitution and the U.S. Constitution and to reflect the current state of the law. Many of these cases involve the Washington State Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Washington constitution. Also, as the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to examine Fourth Amendment search and seizure jurisprudence, its …

Go to article

The Admissibility Of Cell Site Location Information In Washington Courts, Ryan W. Dumm May 2013

The Admissibility Of Cell Site Location Information In Washington Courts, Ryan W. Dumm

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment principally explores when and how a party can successfully admit cell cite location information into evidence. Beginning with the threshold inquiry of relevance, Part III examines when cell site location information is relevant and in what circumstances the information, though relevant, could be unfairly prejudicial, cumulative, or confusing. Part IV provides the bulk of the analysis, which centers on the substantive foundation necessary to establish the information’s credibility and authenticity. Part V looks at three ancillary issues: hearsay, a criminal defendant’s Sixth Amendment confrontation rights, and the introduction of a summary of voluminous records. Finally, Part VI offers …

Go to article

“Lonesome Road”: Driving Without The Fourth Amendment, Lewis R. Katz May 2013

“Lonesome Road”: Driving Without The Fourth Amendment, Lewis R. Katz

Seattle University Law Review

The protections of the Fourth Amendment on the streets and highways of America have been drastically curtailed. This Article traces the debasement of Fourth Amendment protections on the road and how the Fourth Amendment’s core value of preventing arbitrary police behavior has been marginalized. This Article contends that the existence of a traffic offense should not be the end of the inquiry but the first step, and that defendants should be able to challenge the reasonableness even when there is proof of a traffic offense.

Go to article

“Like Wolves In Sheep’S Clothing”: Combating Racial Bias In Washington State’S Criminal Justice System, Krista L. Nelson, Jacob J. Stender Apr 2011

“Like Wolves In Sheep’S Clothing”: Combating Racial Bias In Washington State’S Criminal Justice System, Krista L. Nelson, Jacob J. Stender

Seattle University Law Review

Despite their differences, both the majority and concurring opinions in Monday present new ways to address prosecutorial misconduct, deter the injection of racial bias into courtroom proceedings, and create substantively similar outcomes. Part II of this Note discusses the traditional prosecutorial misconduct test in Washington State, as well as the rules articulated by the Monday majority and concurrence. Part III discusses the implications of both the majority and concurring opinions, the primary differences in their approaches to deterrence, the degree of racial bias they require to warrant reversal of a conviction, and the discretion they afford the judiciary. Part III …

Go to article

The Impact Of Implicit Racial Bias On The Exercise Of Prosecutorial Discretion, Robert J. Smith, Justin D. Levinson Apr 2011

The Impact Of Implicit Racial Bias On The Exercise Of Prosecutorial Discretion, Robert J. Smith, Justin D. Levinson

Seattle University Law Review

The Article is organized as follows: Part II provides an introduction to implicit bias research, orienting readers to the important aspects of implicit bias most relevant to prosecutorial discretion. Part III begins the examination of implicit bias in the daily decisions of prosecutors. The Part presents key prosecutorial discretion points and specifically connects each of them to implicit bias. Part IV recognizes that, despite compelling proof of implicit bias in a range of domains, there is no direct empirical proof of implicit bias in prosecutorial decision-making. It thus calls for an implicit bias research agenda designed to further examine how …

Go to article

Slavery Revisited In Penal Plantation Labor, Andrea C. Armstrong Apr 2011

Slavery Revisited In Penal Plantation Labor, Andrea C. Armstrong

Seattle University Law Review

This Article argues that society must critically examine the types of labor we require our inmates to perform and prohibit the imposition of slavery, even when the enslaved is an inmate. Part II focuses on the text and history of Section 1 of the Thirteenth Amendment11 and argues that the Amendment’s exception allowing forced inmate labor is not as broad as it first appears. Part III examines the Eighth Amendment and how the imposition of slave status on inmates should be considered cruel and unusual punishment. Lastly, Part IV applies these concepts to the history and operation of one such …

Go to article

Dead Wrong: Why Washington’S Deadly Weapon Criminal Sentencing Enhancement Needs “Enhancement”, James Harlan Corning Apr 2011

Dead Wrong: Why Washington’S Deadly Weapon Criminal Sentencing Enhancement Needs “Enhancement”, James Harlan Corning

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment confronts the difficult question of how to reformulate the deadly weapon sentencing enhancement to better align it with the policy goals of deterring and punishing armed crime. Part II explores the constitutional and practical defects in each of the three formulations of the sentencing enhancement’s armed requirement by delving into the enhancement’s legislative history and the judicial struggle to interpret it. Part III analyzes the need for a more nuanced approach to the weapon enhancement by exploring key criticisms about the enhancement’s scope and application. Part IV argues that the Washington legislature must provide courts with more rigid …

Go to article

Domestic Violence And The Budget Crisis: The Use Of A Risk Assessment Tool To Manage Cases In Prosecutors’ Offices, Carrie M. Hobbs Apr 2011

Domestic Violence And The Budget Crisis: The Use Of A Risk Assessment Tool To Manage Cases In Prosecutors’ Offices, Carrie M. Hobbs

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment addresses the growing concern that the incompatible forces of shrinking budgets and increased caseloads are leading to ineffective domestic violence case management, particularly in prosecutors’ offices. With so many cases and so few resources, prosecutors need tools to discern which cases should have priority. Recognizing that risk assessment tools have many drawbacks, this Comment advocates for development of a risk assessment tool that can help prosecutors determine which cases to pursue and assist them in making other pretrial determinations. Part II of this Comment provides a background on domestic violence research and isolates the issues that arise in …

Go to article

“If Justice Is Not Equal For All, It Is Not Justice”: Racial Bias, Prosecutorial Misconduct, And The Right To A Fair Trial In State V. Monday, Michael Callahan Apr 2011

“If Justice Is Not Equal For All, It Is Not Justice”: Racial Bias, Prosecutorial Misconduct, And The Right To A Fair Trial In State V. Monday, Michael Callahan

Seattle University Law Review

This Note argues that of the three opinions from Monday, Washington state courts should follow Chief Justice Madsen’s concurring opinion. The Monday decision also raises three questions that none of the opinions adequately answer: who does Monday apply to, what conduct does Monday forbid, and what is the legal source of the rules from Monday? The court will have to answer these questions in the future to determine the scope of its new rules. Part II of this Note discusses how Washington courts previously addressed the issue of prosecutorial misconduct and appeals to racial bias in trials. Part …

Go to article

Seizing Opportunity, Searching For Theory: Article I, Section 7, George R. Nock Jan 1985

Seizing Opportunity, Searching For Theory: Article I, Section 7, George R. Nock

Seattle University Law Review

Washington case law dealing with searches and seizures has now reached a developmental stage from which it can proceed either haphazardly or along any of several well-defined lines. The purpose of this Article is not to provide a compendium of Washington search-and-seizure cases. Rather, the Article analyzes the more recent (and some of the earlier) cases in which the Washington Supreme Court has interpreted article I, section 7, and suggests several alternative theoretical bases for the further development of Washington constitutional search-and-seizure jurisprudence.

Go to article

First Prev