Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Trial By Google: Judicial Notice In The Information Age, Jeffrey Bellin, Andrew Guthrie Ferguson

Faculty Publications

This Article presents a theory of judicial notice for the information age. It argues that the ease of accessing factual data on the Internet allows judges and litigants to expand the use of judicial notice in ways that raise significant concerns about admissibility, reliability, and fair process. State and federal courts are already applying the surprisingly pliant judicial notice rules to bring websites ranging from Google Maps to Wikipedia into the courtroom, and these decisions will only increase in frequency in coming years. This rapidly emerging judicial phenomenon is notable for its ad hoc and conclusory nature—attributes that have the …

Summary Of Conner V. State Of Nevada, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 49, Kelsey Bernstein

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined three issues: 1) whether, despite there being sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction, the conviction may stand where the State engages in discriminatory jury selection; 2) how a convicted defendant may sufficiently demonstrate that it is more likely than not that the State engaged in purposeful discrimination; and 3) the responsibilities of the district court when ruling on a Batson objection.

State V. Brossart: Adapting The Fourth Amendment For A Future With Drones, Thomas Bryan

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Harris V. State, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 47, Danielle Barraza

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined whether a motion to withdraw a guilty plea filed after the judgment of conviction is a remedy that is “incident to the proceedings in the trial court.”

Criminal Procedure Decisions In The October 2005 Term, Susan N. Herman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Summary Of All Star Bail Bonds, Inc. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 45, Sean Daly

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A defendant who left the country voluntarily, but was denied admission upon returning to the country, is considered “excluded,” not “deported,” for purposes of NRS 178.509(1)(b)(5). Furthermore, a district court may not exonerate a bond without a statutory basis for doing so.

Not-So-Harmless Error: A Higher Standard For Mitigation Errors On Capital Habeas Review, Ryan C. Thomas

Washington Law Review

This Comment looks at how federal courts handle mitigation errors during the penalty phase of capital punishment cases on habeas corpus review; it argues that the United States Supreme Court should expressly adopt the Chapman “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt” standard rather than the Brecht “substantial and injurious effect” standard. The heightened stakes of capital sentencing dictate that a higher standard of review should apply. The Court has yet to rule on this matter, and the United States Courts of Appeals cannot agree upon which standard to apply. Currently, a lopsided circuit split exists regarding whether harmless error review applies …

Smooth And Bumpy Laws, Adam Kolber

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Criminal Court Audience In A Post-Trial World, Jocelyn Simonson

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Not-So-Harmless Error: A Higher Standard For Mitigation Errors On Capital Habeas Review, Ryan C. Thomas

Washington Law Review

This Comment looks at how federal courts handle mitigation errors during the penalty phase of capital punishment cases on habeas corpus review; it argues that the United States Supreme Court should expressly adopt the Chapman “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt” standard rather than the Brecht “substantial and injurious effect” standard. The heightened stakes of capital sentencing dictate that a higher standard of review should apply. The Court has yet to rule on this matter, and the United States Courts of Appeals cannot agree upon which standard to apply. Currently, a lopsided circuit split exists regarding whether harmless error review applies …

The Expanding Use Of Genetic And Psychological Evidence: Finding Coherence In The Criminal Law? , Michael Vitiello

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Killing A Chicken To Scare The Monkey: The Unequal Administration Of Death In China, Jessica J. Shen

Washington International Law Journal

China’s frequent usage of the death penalty in order to achieve deterrence of crime is well known to the international community; however, China also has a strong tradition of legal mercy stemming from imperial rule. In turn, imperial legal mercy originated from Confucian values of benevolence and humaneness. Although modern China emerged as a rejection of Imperial China’s Confucian hierarchal social structures, these cultural traditions have endured. For example, Confucianism’s humane influence can be seen in statutory and procedural mechanisms demonstrating benevolence towards criminals. However, only applying this benevolence to a select group of people betrays modern China’s statutory and …

The Conversational Consent Search: How “Quick Look” And Other Similar Searches Have Eroded Our Constitutional Rights, Alexander A. Mikhalevsky

Georgia State University Law Review

One area in which law enforcement agencies have stretched constitutional limits concerns the scope of a suspect’s consent to search his or her vehicle. Police forces across the country have tested the limits of consent by asking vague, conversational questions to suspects with the goal of obtaining a suspect’s consent to search, even though that individual may not want to allow the search or may not know that he or she has the right to deny consent.

Conversational phrases like “Can I take a quick look?” or “Can I take a quick look around?” have “emerg[ed] as . . . …

53rd Henry J. Miller Distinguished Lecture Series, The Hon. Justice John Paul Stevens

Georgia State University Law Review

Remarks by the Honorable John Paul Stevens, Retired Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, at the 53rd Henry J. Miller Distinguished Lecture Series.

Division Of Labor: The Modernization Of The Supreme Court Of Georgia And Concomitant Workload Reduction Measures In The Court Of Appeals, Kyle G.A. Wallace, Andrew J. Tuck, Max Marks

Georgia State University Law Review

This article addresses two distinct yet interrelated topics: the arcane and unnecessarily complex jurisdictional division between the Georgia Supreme Court and Georgia Court of Appeals, and the excessive caseload at the Georgia Court of Appeals.

In Part I.A., this article discusses Georgia’s appellate system—its history, the jurisdictional division that arose, the confusion the current jurisdictional framework creates, and the limitations and burdens it places on Georgia’s highest court. In Part I.B., the article discusses the current caseload at the Court of Appeals and the burden any jurisdictional reforms would have on the Court of Appeals. In Part II, the article …

Dirty Secrets: The First Amendment In Protective-Order Litigation, Dustin B. Benham

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Incarceration And Reintegration: How It Impacts Mental Health, April M. Marier, Alex Alfredo Reyes

Electronic Theses, Projects, and Dissertations

ABSTRACT

Background: Previous criminal justice policies have been non-effective leading to overpopulated prisons and unsuccessful reintegration. There is a lack of effective supportive and/or rehabilitative services resulting in high rates of recidivism and mental health implications. Objective: This study investigated the perceived impact that incarceration and reintegration with little to no supportive and/or rehabilitative services has on the mental health status of an individual. The emphasis was on participant perception and not on professional reports because of underreporting and lack of attention to mental health in the criminal justice system. Methods: Focus groups in the Inland Empire and Coachella Valley …

Is Guilt Dispositive? Federal Habeas After Martinez, Justin F. Marceau

William & Mary Law Review

Federal habeas review of criminal convictions is not supposed to be a second opportunity to adjudge guilt. Oliver Wendell Holmes, among others, has said that the sole question on federal habeas is whether the prisoner’s constitutional rights were violated. By the early 1970s, however, scholars criticized this rights-based view of habeas and sounded the alarm that postconviction review had become too far removed from questions of innocence. Most famously, in 1970 Judge Friendly criticized the breadth of habeas corpus by posing a single question: Is innocence irrelevant? In his view habeas review that focused exclusively on questions of rights in …

Windsor Beyond Marriage: Due Process, Equality & Undocumented Immigration, Anthony O'Rourke

William & Mary Law Review

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Windsor, invalidating part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, presents a significant interpretive challenge. Early commentators have criticized the majority opinion’s lack of analytical rigor, and expressed doubt that Windsor can serve as a meaningful precedent with respect to constitutional questions outside the area of same-sex marriage. This Article offers a more rehabilitative reading of Windsor and shows how the decision can be used to analyze a significant constitutional question concerning the use of state criminal procedure to regulate immigration.

From Windsor’s holding, the Article distills two concrete doctrinal propositions …

The Punishment Should Fit The Crime—Not The Prior Convictions Of The Person That Committed The Crime: An Argument For Less Impact Being Accorded To Previous Convictions, Mirko Bagaric

San Diego Law Review

The seriousness of the offense is the main consideration that should determine the severity of criminal punishment. This cardinal sentencing principle is undermined by the reality that often the criminal history of the offender is the most decisive sentencing consideration. Recidivists are frequently sent to imprisonment for long periods for crimes, which, when committed by first-time offenders, are dealt with by a bond, probation, or a fine. This makes sentencing more about an individual’s profile than the harm caused by the offender and has contributed to a large increase in prison numbers. Intuitively, it feels right to punish repeat offenders …

Summary Of Gomez V. State, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 43, Laura Guidry

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined two issues: 1) whether the district court properly relied on the incident reports when determining whether to amend the PSI 2) whether a defendant is entitled to due process protections when erroneous statements in his or her PSI will potentially affect his or her prison classification and compromise whether he or she will be released on parole.

Summary Of Sasser V. State, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 41, Jeffrey Pike

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined three issues: 1) whether a district court can amend a presentence investigation report (PSI) in the judgment of conviction rather than amending the PSI itself; 2) whether the district court properly declined to strike information from the PSI; and 3) whether the district court relied on impalpable or highly suspect evidence when sentencing the defendant.

Summary Of Afzali V. State, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 34, Sean Daly

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined whether a defendant has a constitutional right to know the racial composition of a grand jury that indicted him.

The Case For Rational Basis Review Of General Suspicionless Searches And Seizures, Richard C. Worf

Touro Law Review

This article examines the constitutional status of suspicionless searches and seizures of groups- an exceedingly important question in the age of terror, and a subject recently brought back to the forefront by the searches of subway passengers in New York City. It draws on process theory to argue that when a legislature has authorized a group search or seizure, courts should generally apply rational basis review.

First, other areas of constitutional doctrine exhibit deep trust in the power of groups to protect their interests in political process, and there is no reason why fourth amendment doctrine should not do the …

Challenging Unjust Convictions Under Section 1983, Leon Friedman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Court, New York County, People V. Dejesus, Justin Goldberg

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Buari, Matthew Moisan

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Family Court, Queens County, In Re German F. And Hector R., Angelique Hermanowski

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court, Queens County, People V. Tam, Elaine Yang

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People V. Mcfarley, Erica R. Borgese

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.