Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Adding Fuel To The Fire: United States V. Booker And The Crack Versus Powder Cocaine Sentencing Disparity, Briton K. Nelson

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Litigating Child Recruitment Before The Special Court For Sierra Leone, Noah B. Novogrodsky

San Diego International Law Journal

In May 2004, the Special Court for Sierra Leone issued a landmark decision finding that an individual may be held criminally responsible for the offense of recruiting child soldiers into armed conflict. As a hybrid tribunal established by the United Nations and the Government of Sierra Leone to try those who "bear the greatest responsibility" for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed during the country's civil war after November 1996, the Special Court is the first international criminal body to indict a person for the crime of recruiting and employing children in war. The decision in the case of …

Brief Of The University Of Toronto International Human Rights Clinic As Amicus Curiae To The Special Court For Sierra Leone, Noah B. Novogrodsky

San Diego International Law Journal

This brief addresses three questions: 1) the illegality of recruiting child soldiers into armed conflict; 2) the application of penal sanctions in international humanitarian law; and 3) the proper application of the principle of nullum crimen sine lege. Part I of our argument will establish that the recruitment of children into armed conflict is and was unquestionably a violation of international humanitarian law at the time the alleged offences took place. Part II will explain when international law permits prosecution of violations of international humanitarian law irrespective of whether penal sanctions are attached. Amici conclude that such prosecutions are permitted …

Liberalism, Normative Expectations, And The Mechanics Of Fault, Kyron J. Huigens

Articles

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Ford V. State Of Nevada, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 36, Denise S. Balboni

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from jury verdict in criminal trial on grounds that prosecutors impermissibly excluded jurors based on race in violation of Batson v. Kentucky.

Summary Of Stockmeier V. Nev. Dep’T. Of Corrections Psychological Review Panel, 124 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 30, Holly Ludwig

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from district court’s grant of a 12(b)(5) motion to dismiss in favor of Defendant Psych Panel. District court held: (1) that Stockmeier lacked standing to assert violations of the open meeting law; (2) that prisoners cannot conduct the people’s business and therefore cannot assert open meeting law violations; and (3) that Psych Panel hearings qualify as quasi-judicial proceedings and are therefore exempt from the open meeting law.

State V. Martinez: The Boundaries Of Judicial Discretion And The Sixth Amendment Right To Trial By Jury In Arizona, Jamie C. Couche

ExpressO

Is a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury violated when a sentencing judge considers factors beyond those found by a jury and then imposes a super-aggravated sentence? The Arizona Supreme Court says it is not violated so long as the fact-finding satisfies the Apprendi/Blakely progeny.

The Z-Test For Percentages: A Statistical Tool To Detect Pretextually Neutral Juror Challenges, Marvin L. Longabaugh

ExpressO

In the article, I discuss the potential use of public opinion polls to measure the discriminatory effect of certain questions in jury selection. While the laws surrounding race and gender based jury selection are known to most lawyers, there has been little scrutiny on questions that might be posed to potential jurors that are facially neutral, yet have a discriminatory impact. This article examines a number of such questions and offers a statistical test to determine whether a proposed question has, in fact, a 98% certainty of having a discriminatory effect if relied upon in jury selection.

“Murder, Pennsylvania Style”: Comparing Traditional American Homicide Law To The Statutes Of Model Penal Code Jurisdictions, David Crump

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

The Unbearable Lightness Of Batson: Mixed Motives And Discrimination In Jury Selection, Russell D. Covey

ExpressO

The Equal Protection Clause prohibits the use of peremptory challenges to exclude jurors on account of protected characteristics such as race and sex. Mixed-motive problems arise where the proponent of a strike confesses to have been motivated by a combination of proper and improper purposes. In other contexts, so-called “mixed-motive analysis,” which provides the challenged party an opportunity to prove that the “same decision” would have been made absent the improper motive, has been permitted. The United States Supreme Court has not yet ruled, however, on whether “mixed-motive” analysis is consistent with the governing framework set forth in Batson v. …

Entrapment By Numbers, Dru Stevenson

ExpressO

This essay analyzes emerging trends in entrapment law, and is the first to describe the declining numbers of reported cases that involve the entrapment defense. This phenomenon is attributed to decreasing levels of uncertainty in the rules pertaining to the defense, and to discreet procedural issues. The shifting degrees of certainty in penal rules, which have become increasingly mechanical and mathematical over time, are shown to disfavor certain defendants inherently, to the point of being a snare or source of “entrapment” themselves for these individuals. (Published in 16 J. Law & Pub. Pol’y 1 2005)

The Political Economy Of Application Fees For Indigent Criminal Defense, Wayne A. Logan, Ronald F. Wright

Scholarly Publications

In this article, we trace the origin and spread of state laws designed to make indigent criminal defendants pay, up-front, a portion of the costs of their state-appointed counsel. These co-pays, which can range from $10 to over $200, are part of the increasingly popular pay-as-you-go movement, requiring criminal defendants to defray the system costs of their prosecution and punishment.

On their face, such laws would appear to be a natural target of vigorous resistance by the defense bar. This turns out to be only half true, however, for it is often the leaders of public defense organizations, faced with …

Evolution And Denial: State Sentencing After Blakely And Booker, Steven L. Chanenson, Daniel F. Wilhelm

Working Paper Series

Justice Louis Brandeis famously described the states as laboratories where individual jurisdictions can experiment with various legal strategies. In the wake of Blakley v. Washington, and United States v. Booker those laboratories have been working overtime. Since June 2004, both state legislatures and state courts have grappled with the significance of the United States Supreme Court's treatment of the Sixth Amendment in sentencing. It is unsurprising, given the extraordinary significance and potential reach of Blakely and Booker, that this Herculean task has produced divergent results.

Although there are many potential ways to sort those results, for the purposes of these …

Adult Punishment For Juvenile Offenders: Does It Reduce Crime?, Richard E. Redding

Working Paper Series

This chapter discusses the research on the general and specific deterrent effects of transferring juveniles for trial in adult criminal court, identifies gaps in our knowledge base that require further research, discusses the circumstances under which effective deterrence may be achieved, and examines whether there are effective alternatives for achieving deterrence other than adult sanctions for serious juvenile offenders. As a backdrop to this analysis, the chapter first examines the role of public opinion in shaping the get tough policies, and how policy makers have misunderstood and perceived support for these policies.

"Why Don't You Take Another Look At Number Three?": Investigator Knowledge And Its Effects On Eyewitness Confidence And Identification Decisions, Melissa B. Russano, Jason J. Dickinson, Sarah M. Greathouse, Margaret Bull Kovera

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article examines the impact of investigator knowledge on eyewitness identification and confidence, highlighting the potential for bias and the importance of implementing double-blind lineup procedures to mitigate such influences. It emphasizes the need for further research and policy changes to enhance the reliability of eyewitness testimony.

Criminal Law—The Sixth Amendment And The Right To Trial By Jury—Where Do We Go From Here?: The United States Supreme Court Examines The Federal Sentencing Guidelines. United States V. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005)., Brian M. Clary

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reforming Eyewitness Identification: Cautionary Lineup Instructions; Weighing The Advantages And Disadvantages Of Show-Ups Versus Lineups, Nancy K. Mehrkens Steblay

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article argues that the structure and instructions of eyewitness identification procedures significantly influence accuracy, with a focus on the advantages of cautious lineup instructions and the comparative effectiveness of lineups versus show-ups. It emphasizes that subtle changes in lineup instructions can reduce false identifications and improve reliability, while show-ups present unique challenges despite their practical benefits.

Misnamed, Misapplied, And Misguided: Clarifying The State Of Sentencing Entrapment And Proposing A New Conception Of The Doctrine, Jess D. Mekeel

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Europeanizing Self-Incrimination: The Right To Remain Silent In The European Court Of Human Rights, Mark Berger

Faculty Works

Since it came into force in September, 1953, the European Convention on Human Rights has served as a reflection of Europe's movement toward the establishment of common standards of individual human rights and freedoms. The forty-five countries that are currently signatories to the Convention are subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) which was established in 1959 as a mechanism to interpret and enforce the obligations created by the Convention. Although the Convention contains no explicit reference to a right to remain silent, and despite the differing legal systems of the contracting states, the Court …

An Inestimable Safeguard Gives Way To Practicality: Eliminating The Juror Who ""Refuses To Deliberate" Under Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 23(B)(3), Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Police Identification Procedures: A Time For Change, Kenneth Patenaude

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article argues that eyewitness testimony, despite its influence, is often unreliable and a leading cause of wrongful convictions. The author, Lt. Kenneth Patenaude, details his involvement with the Department of Justice in developing the NIJ Guide to improve eyewitness evidence handling. The guide provides best practices aimed at reducing misidentifications and ensuring more reliable evidence in legal proceedings.

Reasonableness Review After Booker, Nancy J. King

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

About a year ago, the Supreme Court in United States v. Booker declared a new standard for the appellate review of federal sentences-reasonableness. Justice Breyer, writing for the Court, asserted reassuringly that the reasonableness standard is not really new at all because judges had been applying it for years to review sentences for crimes lacking specific guidelines, sentences imposed after probation revocation, and, at least until 2003, sentences based upon departures from the recommended guideline range. Like most new legal standards that take shape case-by-case through the appellate process, reasonableness review is developing incrementally, creeping more clearly into view with …

Beyond Absolutism: Legal Institutions In The War On Terror, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Reflections On Standing: Challenges To Searches And Seizures In A High Technology World, José F. Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

Among the profound issues that surround constitutional criminal procedure is the obscure often overlooked issue of who has standing to challenge an illegal search, seizure or confession. Privacy interests are often overlooked because without a legal status that allows a person to complain in court, there is no way to challenge whether one is constitutionally protected from personal invasions. Standing is that procedural barrier often imposed to prevent a person in a case from objecting to improper police conduct because of his or her relationship of ownership, proximity, location, or interest in an item searched or a thing seized. Although …

Detector Dogs And Probable Cause, Richard E. Myers

ExpressO

In this Article, Professor Myers argues that an alert, even by a well-trained dog with an excellent track record in the field, cannot by itself constitute probable cause to search. By using a Bayesian analysis of the value of dog alerts, he demonstrates that additional evidence is needed before probable cause exists. He shows why police won’t make changes to their use of dogs without outside prodding, and explores who might do so. The article makes some suggestions that, if adopted, will improve the courts’ approach to detector dog technologies, allowing them to better strike the balance between the competing …

Developing Reasoned Framework For International Choice With Criminal Procedure, Nancy D. Erbe

ExpressO

While scholars fiercely debate retributive versus restorative justice within the U.S. criminal system, the international community is quietly, steadily and creatively combining the two. Fortunately, enough case study material exists to begin identifying a rational framework to guide future procedural choice.

Sentencing Disparity In Desertion And Absent Without Leave Trials: Advocating A Return Of “Uniform” To The Uniform Code Of Military Justice., Scott R. Sylkatis

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Standing Room Only: Why Fourth Amendment Exclusion And Standing No Longer Logically Coexist, Sherry F. Colb

Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers

The Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule provides that a criminal defendant may suppress the fruits of unreasonable searches and seizures at his prosecution. The Fourth Amendment standing requirement limits the class of criminal defendants who may invoke the exclusionary rule to those who have personally suffered a violation of their rights. This Article argues that the two doctrines are logically inconsistent with each other. The exclusionary rule rests on a foundation of deterrence that takes as its point of departure the police officer's subjective perspective of events and asks: did the information known to him justify his conduct? The standing requirement, …

When 2 Or 3 Come Together, Tracey L. Meares

ExpressO

This article investigates policies that are responsive to crime in disadvantaged, urban neighborhoods from a community-based context. The vehicle is an analysis of a community-wide prayer vigil held in Chicago in May of 1997. The vigil resulted from a collaboration between the Chicago Police Department and hundreds of (mostly) African-American churches on Chicago’s West Side. Strikingly, the local police district’s commander facilitated the vigil. We explain the sociological and political significance of this collaboration by drawing upon the “Chicago School” of urban sociology and demonstrating theoretically and empirically the potential for the collaboration, through the integration of key community institutions, …

Changing Expectations Of Privacy And The Fourth Amendment, Robert Power

ExpressO

Public attitudes about privacy are central to the development of fourth amendment doctrine in two respects. These are the two “reasonableness” requirements, which define the scope of the fourth amendment (it protects only “reasonable” expectations of privacy), and provide the key to determining compliance with its commands (it prohibits “unreasonable” searches and seizures). Both requirements are interpreted in substantial part through evaluation of societal norms about acceptable levels of privacy from governmental intrusions. Caselaw, poll data, newspaper articles, internet sites, and other vehicles for gauging public attitudes after the September 11 attacks indicate that public concerns about terrorism and the …