Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Global Justice Vs. U.S. Global Hegemony: Rejecting Bolton’S Opposition To The Icc, Norman Swazo

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

Former U.S. National Security Advisor John R. Bolton has announced that as an official Trump Administration national security policy, the USA will not support the International Criminal Court (ICC) and instead will work for its demise. At issue here is a concept of global justice versus insistence on US global hegemony and a Pax Americana. Here, the author argues against Bolton's position rejecting the legitimacy of international law and the ICC. Bolton 's appeal to a principle of consent must yield to a principle of salience, as defended by Ronald Dworkin; a concept ofjustice, as advocated by Amartya Sen; and …

The State Of Juvenile Diversion In Kosovo, Jason R. Tashea

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

Through original, in-country interviews and research, this Article will introduce Kosovo's current juvenile diversion system and the need for its continued improvement. Kosovo-Europe 's youngest country-has instituted juvenile diversion, mediation, and educational alternatives to the traditional criminal justice system. This is positive progress, since research shows that children are developmentally more susceptible to reform and reeducation than adults. Thus, rehabilitating a child instead ofpunishing him lessens the chance the child will recommit a crime. However, there is evidence-informed by interviews with national and local stakeholders-that there is still room for procedural and statutory changes to expand the adoption, use, and …

An Intellectual History Of Mass Incarceration, Alice Ristroph

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

State Bd. Of Parole Comm’Rs V. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 53 (Oct. 24, 2019) (En Banc), Dallas Anselmo

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court confronted several issues in this methodical decision. The Court addressed standing and discretionary review in the context of writ petitions. It next analyzes and determines the applicable version of a particular NRS section. Finally, the Court interprets the applicable version of the statute. The opinion culminates in the granting of a writ of mandamus petition for the Parole Board to correct an inaccurate application of law at the district court level.

Climate Of Fear: Admission Of Prior Bad Acts To Establish Coercion In Human Trafficking Cases, Masha Simonova

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article argues that evidence of a defendant's prior bad acts, such as gang membership or violent behavior, should be admissible in human trafficking cases to establish coercion. This evidence is crucial for demonstrating the "climate of fear" created by traffickers, which is central to proving coercion under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). The author contends that such evidence is not only intrinsic to the crime but also admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) for permissible purposes, such as proving intent, knowledge, or modus operandi.

A Second Step Act For The States (And Counties, And Cities), John F. Pfaff

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Criminal Risk Assessment, Brandon L. Garrett

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The First Step Is Actually The ‘Next Step’ After Fifteen Years Of Successful Reforms To The Federal Criminal Justice System, Jesselyn Mccurdy

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Right To Appointed Counsel: The Case For Unaccompanied Immigrant Children, Amanda Kavita Sewanan

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Why Do We Admit Criminal Confessions Into Evidence?, David Crump

Seattle University Law Review

There is an enormous literature about the admissibility of criminal confessions. But almost all of it deals with issues related to self-incrimination or, to a lesser extent, with hearsay or accuracy concerns. As a result, the question whether we ever admit criminal confessions into evidence has not been the subject of much analysis. This gap is odd, since confessions are implicitly disfavored by a proportion of the literature and they often collide with exclusionary doctrines. Furthermore, the self-incrimination issue sometimes is resolved by balancing, and it would help if we knew what we were balancing. Therefore, one might ask: Why …

Striking The Balance: Search Warrants And Encryption Protected Smartphones, Nicholas A. Oliva

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development

(Excerpt)

This note’s analysis of searches of encrypted cell phone will be broken down into in three parts. Part I of this note provides context for the balance between individual privacy and law enforcement by reviewing general Fourth Amendment principles and then Supreme Court rulings that apply these principles to cell phones. Part II then details the advancements in cell phone technology, specifically encryption. These new technologies render the data on cell phones inaccessible and lead law enforcement to go beyond search warrants and seek special orders pursuant to the All Writs Act. Part II provides an overview of the …

The Devil In Recent American Law, L. Joe Dunman

Pace Law Review

Despite its secular aspirations, the American legal system is permeated by Christian and other religious ideas. One of the religious ideas that frequently appears in recent American law is the devil—the unholy antithesis of all that is good in the world. Called by many names, such as Satan, Lucifer, or the Antichrist, the devil is no stranger to the United States court system. The devil arises from the hot depths primarily in five contexts: (1) as a source of injury to reputation in defamation cases; (2) as a prejudicial invocation made during criminal trials to secure conviction, harshen sentences, or …

Unreasonable Revelations: God Told Me To Kill, Linda Ross Meyer

Pace Law Review

This Article focuses on one extreme example of the law’s response to unreasonable revelations that is starkly presented in a series of unsettling murders: those involving criminal defendants who claim they committed their crime because God told them to do it—known as “deific decree” cases. This example of the conflict between revelation and reason tests the limits of law’s ability to understand and countenance revelation when the stakes are highest. The deific decree cases also present the hardest epistemological problems, because the defendant claims that the experience of God’s command is self-authenticating—a position fundamentally at odds with both scientific and …

Menendez-Cordero V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 29 (Jul 25, 2019), Nick Hagenkord

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court concluded that (1) the empanelment of an anonymous jury does not, without actual prejudice, infringe on a defendant’s constitutional rights and the district court satisfied the abuse-of-discretion standard adopted; (2) the district court need not instruct a jury that is responsible for imposing a sentence in a first-degree murder case under NRS 175.552 about the effects of a deadly weapon enhancement; and (3) there was no abuse of discretion in the district court’s decision to admit Menendez-Cordero’s threats as consciousness-of-guilt evidence.

Bowser V. State Of Nevada, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 15 (May 16, 2019), Andrew Brown

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court overruled precedent which held that a presumption of vindictiveness applies when a judge imposes a longer sentence after a new trial.

Banister V. David: Brief Of Amici Curiae Law Professors With Expertise In Habeas Corpus And Civil Procedure In Support Of Petitioner, Eve Brensike Primus

Appellate Briefs

Amici curiae, listed in the Appendix, are law professors and legal scholars who study federal post-conviction law and civil procedure. Amici curiae have no personal interest in the outcome of this case. They all share an interest in seeing habeas law applied in a way that ensures the just and timely adjudication of claims while preserving the traditional and intended operation of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Downgrading Superprecedents, R. George Wright

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Anderson (Arnold) V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 37 (Sept. 5, 2019), Alexandra Matloff

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court held that if a trial court determines by a preponderance of the evidence that a witness is unable to testify because the defendant wrongfully procured the witness’s unavailability and acted with intent to do so, the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exception can be applied in order to deny a defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. The Court also held that in determining whether the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exception applies, the trial court must hear the opposing parties’ arguments in the absence of a jury.

Azucena V. State Of Nevada, 135 Nev. Ad. Op. (Sep. 5, 2019), Mia Mallette

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that the trial judge’s actions during jury selection rose to the level of judicial misconduct in response to a prospective juror indicating she could not be unbiased. These actions could have impeded Azucena’s right to a fair trial with an impartial jury as the court feared that the potential jurors would not have been able to answer candidly about any biases they may have had.

Hager V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 34 (Aug. 29, 2019), Brittney Lehtinen

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) Defendants who successfully complete mental health specialty court diversion programs pursuant to NRS § 176A.250–265 are not “adjudicated mentally ill” under NRS § 202.360(2)(1); and (2) that the jury should have been instructed that under NRS § 202.360(1)(d), an “unlawful user” is someone who regularly uses substances over a period of time consistent with their possession of a firearm.

Andersen V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 42 (Sept. 12, 2019) (En Banc), Erika Smolyar

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In light of recent statutes limiting the right to bear arms for people convicted of misdemeanor battery constituting domestic violence, the Court determined that because the Legislature reclassified misdemeanor battery in that context to constitute a serious offense, those convicted of it are entitled to a jury trial.

Recent Developments: The Right To A Fair Cross-Section Of The Community And The Black Box Of Jury Pool Selection In Arkansas, Raelynn J. Hillhouse

Arkansas Law Review

A Washington County, Arkansas court conducted a hearing on October 15, 2018 on a criminal defendant’s motion to compel discovery to assure a fair and accurate cross-section of the community for the jury as guaranteed by the United States and Arkansas Constitutions. At the hearing, the jury coordinator for the Circuit Clerk’s office testified that counties may elect to use a state-sponsored jury selection computer program, or they may use proprietary programs. Washington County uses a proprietary computer program to select the jury pool from a list of registered voters. The clerk described how her office takes an extra step …

Gideon In The Desert: An Empirical Study Of Providing Counsel To Criminal Defendants In Rural Places, Andrew Davies, Alyssa Clark

Maine Law Review

Access to counsel for criminal defendants is a continuing challenge in rural localities, notwithstanding the mandates of Sixth Amendment jurisprudence. In this Article, we first review the state of the law on access to counsel in criminal cases, noting the latitude allowed to state and local governments in their policy decisions. We then examine empirical approaches to measuring access to counsel and describe in detail both the law and the data on this issue from the state of Texas. We present exploratory analyses of those data comparing rural and urban places for various aspects of access to counsel, including rules …

Viewing Access To Justice For Rural Mainers Of Color Through A Prosecutorial Lens, Maybell Romero

Maine Law Review

Rural areas throughout the country, including those in Maine, are beginning to navigate the challenges and benefits of burgeoning communities of color. District Attorneys’ offices in the state, however, have done little to prepare for this major demographic shift. Maine district attorneys must expand their understanding of their duties to do justice and assure access to justice by better serving rural Mainers of color. While a number of scholars have focused on the legal challenges communities of color face in urban environments as well as those faced by what have been presumed to be White communities in rural areas, this …

“We Are Still Citizens, Despite Our Regrettable Past” Why A Conviction Should Not Impact Your Right To Vote, Jaime Hawk, Breanne Schuster

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Peña-Rodriguez V. Colorado: Carving Out A Racial-Bias Exception To The No-Impeachment Rule, John Austin Morales

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Sixth Amendment safeguards an accused in criminal proceedings and affords them “the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury.” Consistent with this right, the no-impeachment rule prohibits a juror from testifying after a verdict has been handed down about the jurors’ deliberations. While there are limited exceptions to the no-impeachment rule, juror expressed racial bias is not one of them. When presented with the dilemma of a juror using racial bias in deliberations, courts must weigh two competing doctrines that serve as the foundation to our judicial system: (1) affording a defendant his or her …

Deferred Prosecution Agreements In Singapore: What Is The Appropriate Standard For Judicial Approval, Eunice Chua, Benedict Wei Qi Chan

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Originating from the US, deferred prosecution agreements (“DPAs”) have made their way to the UK through the Crime and Courts Act 2013 and Singapore through the Criminal Justice Reform Act 2018. The Singapore model for approval of DPAs draws heavily from the UK and both require proof to a court that DPAs are in the “interests of justice” and that their terms are “fair, reasonable and proportionate” before DPAs can be approved. This paper considers the theoretical basis for the court’s approval of DPAs, critically examines the application of the tests for approval of DPAs in the UK and considers …

Justice On The Line: Prosecutorial Screening Before Arrest, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

Police make more than eleven million arrests every year. Yet prosecutors dismiss about 25% of criminal charges with no conviction being entered. Needless arrests are therefore clogging the criminal justice system and harming criminal defendants. For instance, Freddie Gray was fatally injured in police custody after being arrested for possession of a switchblade knife. Prosecutors later announced, however, that they did not believe the knife was actually illegal. If prosecutors had to approve warrantless arrests before police could take suspects into custody, Freddie Gray would still be alive. Yet prosecutors’ offices almost never dictate who the police should or should …

We The People: These United Divided States, Catherine Powell

Cardozo Law Review

In the wake of President Trump's announcement that he will withdraw the United States from the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change, then-California Governor Jerry Brown called on the President to fight climate change or to "get out of the way" while the rest of the world works to reduce emissions and invest in clean energy. Similarly, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg-now a United Nations (U.N.) Special Envoy for Cities and Climate Change-said, "If Washington won't lead, then mayors and governors will." Indeed, Trump's threat to withdraw has not only been met with widespread criticism and derision abroad …