Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Summary Of State V. Dist. Ct. (Romano), Christina Wang

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Real party in interest Robert Romano is charged in an indictment with four counts of sexual assault of a minor under fourteen years of age and ten counts of lewdness with a child under fourteen years of age. Romano and his girlfriend are the natural parents of the child victim, born May 5, 1997. In November 2002, the child allegedly told her mother that Romano had engaged in inappropriate activities with her. The mother contacted Nevada Child Protective Services and, at that agency’s request, took the child to Sunrise Hospital for evaluation. A pediatric emergency physician at Sunrise testified before …

Countermajoritarian Hero Or Zero - Rethinking The Warren Court's Role In The Criminal Procedure Revolution, Corinna Barrett Lain

Law Faculty Publications

With last fall marking the fiftieth anniversary of Earl Warren's appointment as Chief Justice, enough time has passed to place the criminal procedure revolution in proper historical perspective and rethink the Court's role there as countermajoritarian hero. In the discussion that follows, I aim to do that by examining five of the revolution's most celebrated decisions: Mapp v. Ohio, Gideon v. Wainwright, Miranda v. Arizona, Katz v. United States, and Terry v. Ohio. In none of these cases, I argue, did the Supreme Court act in a manner truly deserving of its countermajoritarian image. To be clear, I do not …

What Happens When Dirty Harry Becomes An [Expert] Witness For The Prosecution?, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Obstructing Justice: The Rise And Fall Of The Aedpa

San Diego Law Review

From 1994 through as late as August 2001, the United States intelligence community1

received information that terrorists had seriously contemplated using airplanes as instruments for carrying out international terrorist attacks.2

This method of attack was clearly “discussed in terrorist circles,” yet community analysts demonstrated little effort to strategically counter such terrorist groups. Moreover, in 1998, U.S. intelligence received specific information that “a group of unidentified Arabs planned to fly an explosive-laden plane from a foreign country into the World Trade Center.” In July 2001, senior government officials were warned of “a significant terrorist attack against U.S. and/or Israeli interests in …

On Aristotelian Criminal Law: A Reply To Duff, Kyron J. Huigens

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Forgotten Constitutional Right To Present A Defense And Its Impact On The Acceptance Of Responbilility-Entrapment Debate, Katrice Bridges Copeland

Faculty Scholarship

This Note argues that Section 3E1.1 of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines must be interpreted to allow defendants who claim entrapment at trial to remain eligible for the acceptance-of-responsibility adjustment. To interpret Section 3E1.1 in any other way would run afoul of defendants' constitutional right to present a defense. Part I argues that the entrapment defense does not put factual guilt at issue; instead the entrapment defense challenges whether the statute should apply to the defendant's conduct. Part II contends that the legislative intent in creating the sentencing guidelines in general and the acceptance-of-responsibility adjustment in particular are furthered by requiring …

Aedpa's "Adjudication On The Merits" Requirement: Collateral Review, Federalism, And Comity, Robert D. Sloane

Faculty Scholarship

The modern law of federal habeas corpus is a labyrinth of counterfactuals and arcane procedural hurdles that few state petitioners manage to navigate-as Justice Blackmun once wrote less charitably in dissent, "a Byzantine morass of arbitrary, unnecessary, and unjustifiable impediments to the vindication of federal rights." The convoluted inquiries required arise from the need to reconcile three developments of the past four decades that remain in tension with one another: first, the Warren Court's expansion of federal habeas relief, identified with Fay v. Noia and its progeny; second, the Burger and Rehnquist Courts' curtailment of that expansion, identified with Wainwright …

Federalism And The Federal Criminal Law, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

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

Faculty Scholarship

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.

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.

Justice Still Fails: A Review Of Recent Efforts To Compensate Individuals Who Have Been Unjustly Convicted And Later Exonerated, Adele Bernhard

Articles & Chapters

With this Article, I hope to motivate state legislators to enact responsible, practical compensation statutes and encourage courts to entertain state law and civil rights claims brought by those who have been unjustly convicted and later exonerated. I begin by looking at the reasons for enacting compensation statutes: uniformity, practicality, popular support, and fairness. Next, I dissect the arguments raised by opponents. Finally, I turn to recent judicial decisions hinting that courts may be stepping in where legislatures fear to tread.

What The Supreme Court Should Do: Save Sentencing Reform, Gut The Guidelines, Aaron J. Rappaport

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Lost History Of Apprendi And The Blakely Petition For Rehearing, Rory K. Little, Teresa Chen

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.