Criminal Procedure Commons^™

The Voice Of Criminal Law, Michelle Madden Dempsey

Faculty Publications

In whose voice does the criminal law speak, and why does it matter? Miriam Gur-Arye argues that the answer to the first question depends on the kind of duty violated by the crime at issue. In some cases (say, election fraud or tax evasion), the criminal law speaks in the voice of the polity—but in other cases (say, murder or rape), it speaks in the voice of human beings. Or so argues Gur-Ayre. Not surprisingly, perhaps, a lot depends on what one means by the voice of the criminal law. In this paper, I defend two related arguments. First, the …

Presidents, Congress, And Classified Information: The Constitutional Limitations And Processes Required To Declassify Information, Nick Dunard

Catholic University Law Review

On August 8 2022, the Federal Bureau of Investigation executed a search warrant at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Resort. The search uncovered hundreds of documents bearing various classification and governmental markings. On June 8, 2023, Trump was indicted in the Southern District of Florida on thirty-seven counts of unlawful retention of national defense information. Almost immediately after the search, the former President and his allies advanced a theory that Trump’s retention of classified documents was permissible because he had declassified the documents before leaving office on January 20, 2021. The former President has repeatedly mentioned these arguments in both …

Sotomayor Cites Maurer Faculty Member In Scotus’ Decline To Hear Alabama Bite Mark Case, James Owsley Boyd

Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)

The case of an Alabama man convicted of murdering his wife in 1985 will not be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court, despite evidence that, nearly 40 years later, has been “wholly discredited.”

The Supreme Court denied certiorari in the case of McCrory v. Alabama, but Justice Sonia Sotomayor cited research from Indiana University Maurer School of Law Professor Valena Beety in her concurring agreement with the court’s decision.

Charles M. McCrory was convicted for the murder of his wife, Julie Bonds, based in large part on expert testimony from an odontologist who matched McCrory’s teeth to two bite marks …

Criminal Confrontation Of The Crime Committed Via An Automated Robot In Libyan And Emirati Law, . Mashaallah Alzwae

Journal of Police and Legal Sciences

Today's world is witnessing an important development in telecommunications, information technology and computers that has resulted in what are known as automated robots as one of the most important applications of artificial intelligence and has increased reliance on them in various areas of life for the importance of the services they provide to humanity. However, such robots may be used to commit an offence and the study therefore aims to determine the effectiveness of legal texts in the face of the offence from which they may occur. The study required an analytical and comparative approach by analysing and comparing the …

The Needless Search For A Founding-Era "Hearsay" Definition, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

Modern Confrontation Clause doctrine permits only unconfronted “out-of-court statements that would have been admissible in a criminal case at the time of the founding.” To operationalize this concept, the Supreme Court identifies “testimonial hearsay” as the Clause’s primary concern. Its opinions regularly dive into the historical record to refine what counts as “testimonial” but ignore that record in defining “hearsay.” This omission cannot last. Cases in the lower courts, and one on the Court’s recent docket, concern testimonial but (arguably) non-hearsay statements. And while confrontation jurisprudence is supposed to be tied to founding-era evidence law, the “hearsay” definition, casually referenced …

When (And Where) Is A Crime A Crime? “Double Criminality” As A Principle Of Fundamental Justice, Robert J. Currie

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The idea that crime crosses borders is fast becoming ordinary, even old hat, particularly in an age of online crime such as ransomware attacks, cyber-extortion and the like. As we have become more geographically mobile, however, it is increasingly common for people to have engaged in criminal conduct in one state1 but then seek to exercise legal rights, or face legal entanglements, in others. Legal questions can then arise about what effect should be given by one state—in this article, Canada—to an individual’s conduct that was, or is alleged to have been, a crime in a foreign state. The inquiry …

Guess Who?: First-Time In-Court Identifications And Due Process, Natalie Beers

Washington and Lee Law Review

Juries believe eyewitnesses. When an identifying eyewitness takes the stand and points to a defendant in a courtroom, the jury is more likely to render a guilty verdict. But how reliable is that identification? What if the eyewitness is on the stand identifying a perpetrator for the first time, in the court room, rather than at the police station with a lineup or photo array? How do those suggestive circumstances implicate a criminal defendant’s due process rights?

First-time in-court identifications are inherently suggestive. While the Supreme Court has acknowledged the suggestive nature of similar identifications, it did not directly address …

Murder On The Hearsay Trail, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

Judges, lawyers, and law students struggle to apply American evidence law’s most distinctive feature—the hearsay prohibition. The problem is that hearsay is difficult to master and somewhat dull. At the same time, hearsay evidence is ubiquitous and important. Every litigator has a story about a judge’s eccentric hearsay rulings; mine is the trial judge who waved his hand dismissively at hearsay objections, letting witnesses answer on the grounds that “I want to hear it.” And the case law is littered with appellate opinions scolding trial judges for erroneous hearsay rulings while introducing errors of their own.

That is just the …

The Dark Plea: One Of The Most Coercive Abuses Of Power Permitted In The Criminal Justice System, Michael P. Donnelly

Et Cetera

Most prosecutions in our criminal justice system are resolved by defendants entering ostensibly knowing and intelligent guilty pleas—often following negotiations with the state—before trial. But during my time as a trial judge, I encountered a different type of guilty plea, procured by the state when an already convicted offender sought to clear his or her name through an application for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence. I believe the “Dark Pleas” secured in these circumstances are one of the greatest abuses of power permitted in the criminal justice process.

This article sets down in writing a speech I …

ضمانات المتهم في مرحلة التحقيق الأولي وفق التشريع الأردني, Qusai Mahmoud Seliman Al Qutishat

Journal of the Association of Arab Universities for Research in Higher Education مجلة اتحاد الجامعات العربية للبحوث في التعليم العالي

هدف المقال التعرف على ضمانات المتهم في مرحلة التحقيق الأولي وفق التشريع الأردني، وبينت المقصود بالمتهم وشروطه والفرق بين المتهم والمشتبه به والظنين، ومفهوم التحقيق الأولي وأهميته واختلافه عن التحقيق الابتدائي، وماهي مهام واختصاصات الضابطة العدلية وفق التشريع الأردني، وتوضيح ضمانات المتهم في مرحلة التحقيق الأولي وفق التشريع الأردني. وخلصت الدراسة إلى نتائج عدة منها أنه يجوز لأفراد الأمن العام القيام بالطرق المشروعة بأي عمل من شأنه جمع المعلومات والإيضاحات وجمع الأدلة المثبتة لوقوع الجريمة ونسبتها إلى فاعلها، وأن ضمانات المتهم وسائل منحها القانون كحماية للمشتكى عليه من أي اعتداء أو ضرر يهدده، سواء في جسده أو حياته الخاصة أو …

Law School News: Professor Tara I. Allen Announced As Federal Public Defender 6-5-2024, Helga Melgar

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Confronting Algorithms: Conscience Catching In The Criminal Trial And Beyond, Sherman J. Clark

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Using the question of how to treat algorithmic evidence under the Confrontation Clause as an entry point, I argue that the use of AI in ethically salient situations presents a risk. It may cause us to avoid confronting our own responsibility. This matters because facing up to what we do, including what we delegate, can help us grow and thrive. Bearing responsibility can help us nurture vital capacities, including forms of empathy, honesty, and dignity. In the language of ethics, these are eudaimonist virtues—traits and capacities that can help us live well and fully. We should thus find ways of …

An Abiding Commitment To The Death Penalty? Centrality Of The Rule Of Law In The Administration Of Capital Punishment In Singapore, Eugene K. B. Tan

Singapore Law Journal (Lexicon)

Capital punishment remains in use in Singapore. The Singapore government’s position is that the death penalty works in deterring the most serious crimes. Public trust and confidence remains healthy that the death penalty regime in Singapore has the requisite deterrent effect on criminals and has sufficient safeguards to prevent any miscarriage of justice. In 2012, the Singapore Parliament made significant amendments to the Penal Code and the Misuse of Drugs Act, marking a shift from the longstanding mandatory to a discretionary death penalty system for some of the most serious crimes. It demonstrates the authorities’ belief that the mandatory death …

Can Too Much Clarity Cause Confusion? A Case Study Of Mccalop V. State, Sutton M. Eggena

Mercer Law Review

In criminal trials, few elements wield as much influence over the outcome as expert testimony. Expert testimony serves as the bridge between complex subject matter and the understanding of lay jurors, often occupying a pivotal position in the pursuit of justice. Indeed, expert testimony can be the lynchpin on which a jury’s verdict turns. Picture a courtroom filled with jurors, each presumed to lack a deep understanding of the intricate dynamics of domestic abuse and the profound effects of battered person syndrome on individuals trapped in violent relationships. In pursuit of justice, these jurors lean on a singular source—an expert …

Proprietors Beware: Recent Changes In Negligent Security Cases Involving Third-Party Criminal Acts And The State Of The Law Moving Forward After The Supreme Court Of Georgia’S Most Recent Decision In Georgia Cvs V. Carmichael, Blake Williamson

Mercer Law Review

The burgeoning surge in criminal activity within the United States has precipitated a corresponding increase in legal actions aimed at ascertaining the liability of business proprietors for crimes that transpire on their premises. Although the legal and factual questions surrounding the attribution of liability for the criminal acts of third parties often prove intricate, the crux of the matter remains consistent with that encountered in other premises liability actions—namely, did the proprietor possess superior knowledge of the danger that injured the plaintiff?

Just Me, Myself, And I: Georgia Trial Courts May Consider Pro Se Motions Filed By Represented Criminal Defendants, Mckayla A. Doss

Mercer Law Review

For decades, Georgia’s trial courts have applied the absolute rule that pro se motions filed by represented (or presumably represented) criminal defendants were a legal nullity. In essence, hybrid representation was not permitted—legal representation precluded criminal defendants from acting as “co-counsel” or filing their own pro se motions.The application of this absolute rule substantially affected the time-sensitive period that follows a criminal conviction, as defendants in Georgia have a limited period of time to file a notice of appeal or a motion for new trial before the window of direct appeal closes. Failure to file these motions results in the …

The Needless Search For A Founding-Era "Hearsay" Definition, Jeffrey Bellin

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Modern Confrontation Clause doctrine permits only unconfronted “out-of-court statements that would have been admissible in a criminal case at the time of the founding.” To operationalize this concept, the Supreme Court identifies “testimonial hearsay” as the Clause’s primary concern. Its opinions regularly dive into the historical record to refine what counts as “testimonial” but ignore that record in defining “hearsay.” This omission cannot last. Cases in the lower courts, and one on the Court’s recent docket, concern testimonial but (arguably) non-hearsay statements. And while confrontation jurisprudence is supposed to be tied to founding-era evidence law, the “hearsay” definition, casually referenced …

Criminal Legal Reform In New Hampshire: One Law Professor's Activism, Albert E. Scherr

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

Criminal legal reform is a perpetual work in progress. The system itself is, at best, maddeningly imperfect. It too often fails to produce anything close to justice. Structural problems afflict the system in a way that incarcerates too many people, particularly people of color. For example, over the last thirty years, the Innocence Project has demonstrated imperfections in the system caused by faulty eyewitness identification procedures by ineffective assistance of counsel, by prosecutorial misconduct, by shoddy forensic practices and by police behavior that produced false confessions.

That the United States has well over fifty-one independent criminal legal systems frustrates efforts …

All Roads Lead To Rome: Combating Impunity For Perpetration Of Slave Trade And Slavery Crimes, Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum

Articles

The Republic of Sierra Leone has proposed amendments to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to include, inter alia, provisions for the slave trade as a crime against humanity and has recommended that the General Assembly include the slave trade as an enumerated crime in the Draft articles on Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity (CAH) (Draft articles). This declaration came nearly five years after Cardozo’s Benjamin B Ferencz Human Rights and Atrocity Prevention Clinic, on behalf of slavery crimes expert Patricia Viseur Sellers, sent commentaries to the United Nations International Law Commission (ILC) to revise …

Redistributing Justice, Benjamin Levin, Kate Levine

Articles

This Essay surfaces an obstacle to decarceration hiding in plain sight: progressives’ continued support for the carceral system. Despite progressives’ increasingly prevalent critiques of criminal law, there is hardly a consensus on the left in opposition to the carceral state. Many left-leaning academics and activists who may critique the criminal system writ large remain enthusiastic about criminal law in certain areas— often areas in which defendants are imagined as powerful and victims as particularly vulnerable.

In this Essay, we offer a novel theory for what animates the seemingly conflicted attitude among progressives toward criminal punishment—the hope that the criminal system …

Authenticating Social Media Evidence In Chinese Criminal Procedure Law -- A Comparative Study, Yage Huang

Maurer Theses and Dissertations

Authentication requires the proponent to provide sufficient proof that the proposed social media evidence is, indeed, what it is claimed to be. The rapid proliferation of social media evidence has posed significant challenges for its authentication. This dissertation explores the authentication challenges for social media evidence in a comprehensive manner.

This research employs a qualitative research methodology, including theoretical and analytical methods, to examine the theoretical approaches, statutory provisions, and recent judicial rulings related to the authentication of social media evidence within the legal frameworks of China and the United States. Through a comparative analysis, this study reveals significant commonalities …

Voice Stress Analysis: Is “Some Evidence” Sufficient Grounds For Making Legal Determinations?, Brad Mccall

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Georgian Case For Harmless Constitutional Error Reform, John Evan Laughter

Georgia State University Law Review

This Note examines Georgia’s application of harmless error review to constitutional errors and proposes a new standard to remedy deficiencies.

Standing And Criminal Law, F. Andrew Hessick, Sarah A. Benecky

BYU Law Review

According to the Supreme Court, the “irreducible constitutional minimum of Article III standing” is a concrete, particularized injury in fact that is traceable to the defendant and redressable by a favorable judgment. But this set of requirements does not apply in criminal cases. The federal government has authority to bring prosecutions for any violation of federal criminal law, regardless of whether the crime caused concrete harm to the United States or anyone else, and even though the punishment for the crime does not redress an injury in any conventional sense.

This Article argues that the difference in standing requirements between …

Computationally Assessing Suspicion, Wesley M. Oliver, Morgan A. Gray, Jaromir Savelka, Kevin D. Ashley

University of Cincinnati Law Review

Law enforcement officers performing drug interdiction on interstate highways have to decide nearly every day whether there is reasonable suspicion to detain motorists until a trained dog can sniff for the presence of drugs. The officers’ assessments are often wrong, however, and lead to unnecessary detentions of innocent persons and the suppression of drugs found on guilty ones. We propose a computational method of evaluating suspicion in these encounters and offer experimental results from early efforts demonstrating its feasibility. With the assistance of large language and predictive machine learning models, it appears that judges, advocates, and even police officers could …

“No Superior But God”: History, Post Presidential Immunity, And The Intent Of The Framers, Trace M. Maddox

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

This essay is directly responsive to one of the most pressing issues currently before the courts of the United States: the question of whether former Presidents enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution for acts they committed in office. Building upon the recent ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in United States v. Trump, 91 F.4th 1173 (D.C. Cir. 2024) this essay argues that the clear answer to that question is a resounding “no”.

Former President Trump, who has now appealed the D.C. Circuit’s ruling to the Supreme Court, contends that post-presidential criminal immunity is …

Opening Brief For Plaintiff-Appellant Rocky Freeman, Madeline H. Meth, Sanketh Bhaskar, Henry Drembus, Brianna Jordan

Faculty Scholarship

For nearly two decades, while Rocky Freeman was in federal prison, the United States treated him like a contract killer who murdered two victims even though the U.S. Probation Office knew that this information was false, and the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) knew or should have known the same merely by looking at Freeman’s pre-sentence report (PSR). As a result, Freeman spent years subject to harsh conditions of confinement that he would not have experienced had probation or BOP officers acted with reasonable care. Since learning about this negligence, Freeman has sought repeatedly to remedy the various harms he suffered, …

A Federal Inmate’S Right To Stay Home, Jordan Thorn

Texas A&M Law Review

Since the start of the COVID–19 pandemic, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) has, for the first time in history, placed tens of thousands of inmates onto home confinement. Likely due to the unprecedented nature and rapid release of inmates to contain the virus, the BOP failed to timely update their policies and procedures surrounding the disciplinary system of inmates on home confinement. This failure to update resulted in the BOP removing inmates from home confinement and placing them back in prison for minor violations. Furthermore, when the BOP chose to remove an inmate from home confinement, it did so …

Successive But Not Successful: Does The Aedpa Allow Federal Prisoners To Reassert Previously Presented Claims For Habeas Relief?, Michael P. Bitgood

Texas A&M Law Review

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) unequivocally bars state prisoners from reasserting previously presented claims for habeas relief. Currently, the circuits are embroiled in a disagreement regarding whether the AEDPA also bars federal prisoners in the same way, and federal prisoners’ potentially viable claims for habeas relief hang in the balance. Prior to the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Jones v. United States, six circuits agreed that the AEDPA does bar federal prisoners’ previously asserted habeas claims, but the Sixth Circuit alone disagreed. Now, the Jones decision aligns the Ninth Circuit with the Sixth Circuit’s position. …

Impeaching With An Alleged Prior False Accusation, Erin Murphy

Fordham Law Review

The Court’s categorical recognition of bias as a constitutionally protected, and therefore rape-shield recognized, exception to the general bar on evidence of sexual history has led to questions about whether other forms of impeachment might also evade rape shield restrictions. In particular, courts have grappled with the admissibility of impeachment by evidence of a prior false accusation (PFA).

The current treatment of PFAs is inconsistent and controversial for several reasons. First, as explained further in Part I, there is a lack of clear guidance in the rules about how such evidence should be treated. Second, of course, there are the …