Criminal Procedure Commons^™

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 …

The Admissibility Of Hearsay Evidence In New York State Sex Offender Civil Commitment Hearings After State V. Floyd Y.: Finding A Balance Between Promoting The General Welfare Of Sexual Assault Victims And Providing Due Process Of Law, Brittany K. Dryer

Fordham Law Review

    In twenty states throughout the country, the government may petition for the civil commitment of detained sex offenders after they are released from prison. Although processes differ among the states, the government must generally show at a court proceeding that a detained sex offender both suffers from a mental abnormality and is dangerous and that this combination makes a detained sex offender likely to reoffend. At such court proceedings, both the government and the respondent will present evidence to either the court or the jury on these issues. As in most court proceedings, hearsay evidence is inadmissible at sex offender …

Prejudicial Character Evidence: How The Circuits Apply Old Chief To Federal Rule Of Evidence 403, Hannah J. Goldman

Fordham Law Review

    It is a fundamental principle of the American justice system that a defendant should be judged on the facts of the case at issue and not for the defendant's general character or past indiscretions. Federal Rule of Evidence 404, which prohibits character evidence, addresses this issue. Rule 403 represents another principle of the justice system: the legal system favors admissibility of evidence over its exclusion. There are some exceptions to this principle, including when evidence is so highly prejudicial that it outweighs the benefits of its admission. As 404(b) character evidence is almost always highly prejudicial to the defendant, trial …

To Tell You The Truth, Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 24(A) Should Be Amended To Permit Attorneys To Conduct Voir Dire Of Prospective Jurors, C. J. Williams

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

Regulation Or Resistance: A Counter-Narrative Of Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Alice Ristroph

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Beyond The Visiting Room: A Defense Counsel Challenge To Conditions In Pretrial Confinement, Amber Baylor

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

Method Of Attack: A Supplemental Model For Hate Crime Analysis, Angela D. Moore

Indiana Law Journal

On October 28, 2009, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act (HCPA) was signed into law by President Barack Obama. Two years later, between September and November of 2011, members of a Bergholz, Ohio, Amish community allegedly carried out five attacks in which they forcibly restrained, and cut the hair and beards of, members of other Amish communities. In September of 2012, a jury rendered a verdict in United States v. Mullet and found sixteen members of the Bergholz community—including Samuel Mullet, bishop of the community—guilty of HCPA violations. These were the first convictions for religion-based …

The Corporate Conspiracy Vacuum, J. S. Nelson

Cardozo Law Review

In the absence of charges available for traditional conspiracy, public and judicial frustration with agents' lack of accountability has led to the distortion of alternative doctrines in efforts to impose liability on what should have been traditional conspiracy prosecutions. This paper examines those efforts and their impact on these alternative doctrines.

Beyond The Visiting Room: A Defense Counsel Challenge To Conditions In Pretrial Confinement, Amber Baylor

Faculty Scholarship

Defense attorneys are well acquainted with the ill-considered and extreme use of solitary confinement in local jails. Isolation is one of many problems clients face while locked up in jail awaiting trial. Other common conditions of pretrial confinement include lack of mental health treatment, inadequate medical care, violence from corrections staff, and lack of protection from the violence of others. "Owing time", a recently dismantled practice, is just one example of jails' frivolous use of extreme isolation practices. At times, youth in the juvenile facility at Rikers were placed in solitary so often that there was a waitlist at the …

An Overlooked Key To Reversing Mass Incarceration: Reforming The Law To Reduce Prosecutorial Power In Plea Bargaining, Cynthia Alkon

Faculty Scholarship

The need to “do something” about mass incarceration is now widely recognized. When President Obama announced plans to reform federal criminal legislation, he focused on the need to change how we handle non-violent drug offenders and parole violators. Previously, former Attorney General Eric Holder announced policies to make federal prosecutors “smart on crime.” These changes reflect, as President Obama noted, the increasing bipartisan consensus on the need for reform and the need to reduce our incarceration rates. However, proposals about what to reform, such as President Obama’s, tend to focus on some parts of criminal sentencing and on prosecutorial behavior …

Lessons Learned From Ferguson: Ending Abusive Collection Of Criminal Justice Debt, Neil L. Sobol

Faculty Scholarship

On March 4, 2015, the Department of Justice released its scathing report of the Ferguson Police Department calling for “an entire reorientation of law enforcement in Ferguson” and demanding that Ferguson “replace revenue-driven policing with a system grounded in the principles of community policing and police legitimacy, in which people are equally protected and treated with compassion, regardless of race.” Unfortunately, abusive collection of criminal justice debt is not limited to Ferguson. This Article, prepared for a discussion group at the Southeastern Association of Law Schools conference in July 2015, identifies the key findings in the Department of Justice’s report …

For Whom The Data Tolls: A Reunified Theory Of Fourth And Fifth Amendment Jurisprudence, Bryan H. Choi

Cardozo Law Review

Data privacy demands a reunified theory of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. Data technologies allow personal information to be disembodied from physical bodies and "possessed" simultaneously by both first persons and third parties. As a result, the government has been able to use a divide-and-conquer strategy to obtain incriminating evidence alternately from the data intermediary or from the suspect.

Currently, Fourth Amendment doctrine and Fifth Amendment doctrine work at cross-purposes. The privacy community has already sounded the alarm on the "third-party doctrine," which allows the government to sidestep the Fourth Amendment when demanding evidence from third parties. But few have …

No Law And No Order: Local, State And Federal Government Responses To The United States Rape Kit Backlog Crisis, Glenne Ellen Fucci

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

A Look Back At The "Gatehouses And Mansions" Of American Criminal Procedure, Yale Kamisar

Articles

I am indebted to Professor William Pizzi for remembering—and praising—the “Gatehouses and Mansions” essay I wrote fifty years ago. A great many articles and books have been written about Miranda. So it is nice to be remembered for an article published a year before that famous case was ever decided.

Procedural Triage, Matthew J.B. Lawrence

Fordham Law Review

    Prior scholarship has assumed that the inherent value of a "day in court" is the same for all claimants, so that when procedural resources (like a jury trial or a hearing) are scarce, they should be rationed the same way for all claimants. That is incorrect. This Article shows that the inherent value of a "day in court" can be far greater for some claimants, such as first-time filers, than for others, such as corporate entities and that it can be both desirable and feasible to take this variation into account in doling out scarce procedural protections. In other words, …

Pinholster's Hostility To Victims Of Ineffective State Habeas Counsel, Jennifer Utrecht

Michigan Law Review

Cullen v. Pinholster foreclosed federal courts from considering new evidence when reviewing 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) petitions for claims previously adjudicated on the merits in state court. This decision has a particularly adverse effect on petitioners whose state habeas counsel left an incomplete or undeveloped record. This Note discusses strategies for victims of ineffective state habeas counsel to avoid the hostile mandate of Pinholster. It argues that, in light of Martinez v. Ryan’s recognition of the importance of counsel in initialreview collateral proceedings, courts should be wary of dismissing claims left un- or underdeveloped by ineffective state habeas counsel. It …

The Future Of Confession Law: Toward Rules For The Voluntariness Test, Eve Brensike Primus

Michigan Law Review

Confession law is in a state of collapse. Fifty years ago, three different doctrines imposed constitutional limits on the admissibility of confessions in criminal cases: Miranda doctrine under the Fifth Amendment, Massiah doctrine under the Sixth Amendment, and voluntariness doctrine under the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. But in recent years, the Supreme Court has gutted Miranda and Massiah, effectively leaving suspects with only voluntariness doctrine to protect them during police interrogations. The voluntariness test is a notoriously vague case-by-case standard. In this Article, I argue that if voluntariness is going to be the framework for …

Federalism, Federal Courts, And Victims' Rights, Michael E. Solimine, Kathryn Elvey

Catholic University Law Review

One of the most striking developments in American criminal law and procedure in the past four decades has been the widespread establishment of victims’ rights at both the federal and state levels. A conspicuous exception to the success of the victims’ rights movement has been the failure of Congress to pass a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would uniformly establish such rights in all federal and state courts. Advanced by both private organizations and state officials, and with bipartisan support in Congress, bills establishing a Victims’ Rights Amendment (VRA) have been introduced several times in the past three …

State V. Merlino, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 65 (Sept. 10, 2015), Brittany L. Shipp

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The issue before the Court was whether selling stolen property through a retractable sliding tray on a pawn shop’s drive-through window satisfied the element of unlawful entry of a building as defined in the burglary statute. The Court held that when the outer boundary of a building is not self-evident from the shape and contours of the structure itself, courts must apply California’s “reasonable belief” test which legally defines the outer boundary to include, “any element that encloses an area into which a reasonable person would believe that a member of the general public could not pass without authorization.”

Downgrading Non-Violent Drug Crimes:An End To The “Lock ‘Em And Leave ‘Em” Mentality, Tran T. Nguyen

Journal of Public Law and Policy

No abstract provided.

State V. Smith, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 63 (Sept. 3, 2015), Jessie Vargas

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Defendant Terrance Reed Smith entered a no contest plea to one count of child abuse resulting in substantial bodily harm. The Supreme Court of Nevada held Smith’s plea was involuntary because the plea was made in response to acts of coercion by the Washoe County Department of Social Services (“DDS”).

Testimony On Oklahoma Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform, Stephen Henderson

Other Faculty Publications

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to you today about Senate Bill 838 and the reform of Oklahoma’s civil asset forfeiture. I am a professor of law at the University of Oklahoma, where my teaching and research focus on criminal law and procedure. I have experience achieving consensus solutions in contested areas of law, most notably in the six years I spent drafting a new set of ABA Criminal Justice Standards, and I know that change is rarely easy. No matter the topic and whatever the status quo, there is sure to be someone who feels it is …

Cassinelli V. State Of Nevada, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 62 131(Aug. 27, 2015), Mackenzie Warren

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court of Appeals determined that (1) the district court erred by ruling that Cassinelli was not eligible for alcohol treatment under NRS § 458.300(1)(d); (2) the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Cassinelli’s request for assignment to a program of treatment; (3) the plea agreement was not breached and the prosecutor did not engage in misconduct at sentencing; (4) the district court did not err by refusing Cassinelli an opportunity to cross-examine the victim during her impact statement at sentencing; (5) Cassinelli’s sentence was illegal.

The Administratioin Of Criminal Justice In The U.S.S.R., John H. Shoemaker

Akron Law Review

The above procedure in the United States is conducted as follows: on the state and local level by the local police departments, with the arraignment and indictment being handled by the local county prosecutor; or on the federal level by federal police agencies operating through the U. S. attorney. The incarceration of the convicted person is handled by county or state agencies on the one hand, or federal penal institutions on the other. One similarity between the Russian System and ours is that in United States criminal practice on the federal level the coordination and uniformity essential to reform and …

Privilege Against Self-Incrimination - Right To Compel A Suspect To Perform Physical Acts; City Of Piqua V. Hinger, Charles P. Brumbach

Akron Law Review

The writer respectfully disagrees with the Ohio Supreme Court's interpretation of Schmerber as standing for the proposition that such compelled evidence is admissible under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. In Schmerber the court merely recognized the evidential distinction between real and testimonial or communicative evidence and ruled that the distinction was determinative in that case. The court acknowledged that there are many possible situations in which the distinction could not so readily be applied. It is submitted that the facts of the instant case present one of those situations.

Application Of Ohio Post-Conviction Procedure - Effect Of Prior Judgment On.; Coley V. Alvis, Thomas A. Geraci Jr.

Akron Law Review

In the per curiam decision of Coley v. Alvis' the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed an Ohio District Court decision dismissing Coley's petition for habeas corpus for failure to exhaust his state remedies. The circuit Court remanded, stating that it would be futile for petitioner to attempt to void his conviction under the Ohio post-conviction statute because of the narrow limits placed on it by the state courts and that there was consequently no longer any effective state remedy. Since the grounds that petitioner set forth to sustain his writ did not fall within any …

Constitutional Rights Of Youthful Offenders; In The Matter Of Gault, Robert M. Kunczt

Akron Law Review

After the decisions in Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U. S. 335 (1963), Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (1966), and Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U. S. 478 (1964), which revealed the Supreme Court's solicitude of the constitutional rights of adults, it seemed improbable that the lower courts would long be permitted to continue ignoring the constitutional rights of juveniles. Thus the decision in the principal case, which represents a breakthrough in the assurance of a fair hearing to minors, comes as no surprise. The case holds that under the Fourteenth Amendment a juvenile has a right to notice of …

Ohio's Post-Conviction Appeal Remedy, Timothy J. Murty

Akron Law Review

Ohio has recently adopted legislation intended to provide a prisoner with a means of testing, in the court which originally imposed sentence, the constitutional validity of his sentence. This legislation is intended to provide a remedy which will supplement the writ of habeas corpus. Jurisdiction in habeas corpus proceedings lies in the court of the county in which the prisoner is confined. In recent years the courts located in counties containing state correctional institutions have been deluged with habeas corpus petitions.

Rights Of State Prisoners - Federal Court Intervention In State Prison Administration; Jones V. Wittenberg, Ronald L. Collins

Akron Law Review

The path to federal court intervention into state prison administration has been a tortuous and rocky one.... Jones v. Wittenberg carries federal court intervention into state prison administration to new lengths. Until more basic and lasting changes are made on the part of society and the states, such intervention seems to be the best chance for ameliorating conditions in our state penal systems.

Voir Dire: Strategy And Tactics In The Defense Of Social And Political Activists, Murray R. Bowes

Akron Law Review

With the courts increasingly being the forum for legal disputes between those who demand change in the superstructure and those who represent (or are) the structure, a rather unfortunate by-product has evolved: a feeling that the courts can no longer adequately dispense justice.8 This manifests itself in beliefs that if one is prosecuted for activities that were designed to advance social change, either in violation of the law or not, that the individual will not be afforded a fair trial; 9 a reflection that the social or political activist will not be judged by an impartial jury….For the purposes of …