Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Saying Goodbye To A Legend: A Tribute To Yale Kamisar - My Mentor, Teacher, And Friend, Eve Brensike Primus

Michigan Law Review

I remember it as though it was yesterday - dozens of students filing into Hutchins Hall for their first criminal procedure class. The legendary Yale Kamisar walked briskly to the front of the room, his upper body moving first slightly forward and then ever so slightly backward in almost a rocking manner. He carried nothing except for a two-inch black notebook, tattered at the edges and marked with brightly colored tabs protruding from each page. Paying no attention to the hundreds of eyes fixed on his every move, he dropped the notebook on the podium, stepped up to the blackboard, …

Yale Kamisar: The Enemy Of Injustice, Welsh S. White

Michigan Law Review

In the summer of 1978, Duke Law School hosted a conference in which a variety of speakers offered perspectives on Constitutional Criminal Procedure. One of the speakers argued that the Warren Court's criminal-procedure revolution created a backlash that ultimately made things worse for criminal defendants. In order to dramatize his point, he suggested, "Yale Kamisar is the enemy." When that speaker had finished, the Conference Moderator began his response by stating, "First of all, Yale Kamisar is not the enemy of anything, except injustice."

Publications By Professor Yale Kamisar, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

A bibliography of publications by Yale Kamisar.

The "Routine Traffic Stop" From Start To Finish: Too Much "Routine," Not Enough Fourth Amendment, Wayne R. Lafave

Michigan Law Review

Yale Kamisar, about which I have said too much elsewhere in this issue of the Review, could rightly be called "Mr. Confessions," for he has not only authored books and a host of articles on the subject of police interrogation, but for years has been printing Miranda cards in his basement and selling them to police departments all across the nation. Moreover, he may be the only law professor in the country who has both personally coerced a confession and had a confession coerced out of him. As Kamisar has himself noted, my own "intellectual sandbox" has been the …

Stories About Miranda, George C. Thomas Iii

Michigan Law Review

It is no exaggeration to say that Yale Kamisar was present at the creation of Miranda v. Arizona. To be sure, the seeds of Miranda had been sown in earlier cases, particularly Escobedo v. Illinois, but Escobedo was a Sixth Amendment right to counsel case. Professor Kamisar first saw the potential for extending the theory of Escob edo to the Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. Escob edo theorized that a healthy criminal justice system requires that the accused know their rights and are encouraged to exercise them. The Escobedo Court read history to teach that no system …

A Deadly Dilemma: Choices By Attorneys Representing "Innocent" Capital Defendants, Welsh S. White

Michigan Law Review

A lawyer who represents a capital defendant with a strong innocence claim must allocate her resources between the separate guilt and penalty phases of the capital case. Expending resources in preparation for a penalty trial may result in less attention to securing the acquittal on the capital charge at the guilt trial that would make the penalty phase moot. But focusing primarily on proving the defendant's innocence at the guilt trial means less preparation in the case of a guilty verdict. Once a defendant is convicted of a capital offense, a lawyer must also make strategic decisions about the penalty …

Sattazahn V. Pennsylvania: Double Jeopardy And The Definition Of "Acquittal" In Capital-Sentencing Proceedings, Matthew G. Howells

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Double Due Process Denial: The Crime Of Providing Material Support Or Resources To Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations, Randolph N. Jonakait

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

What The Supreme Court Should Do: Save Sentencing Reform, Gut The Guidelines, Aaron J. Rappaport

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Lost History Of Apprendi And The Blakely Petition For Rehearing, Rory K. Little, Teresa Chen

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Sexual Assault Crisis In The United States Air Force Academy, Colleen Dalton

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note examines the systemic crisis of sexual assault at the United States Air Force Academy, highlighting how military culture, legal frameworks, and institutional failures perpetuate this issue. It argues that comprehensive legal and cultural reforms are necessary to address the pervasive gender discrimination and retaliation against victims. The analysis emphasizes the need for Congress to modernize the Uniform Code of Military Justice and for the military to adopt a model that promotes gender equality and accountability.

Beyond Blakely, Nancy J. King, Susan Riva Klein

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Federal criminal sentencing in the wake of Blakely v. Washington is, to put it charitably, a mess. In holding that Blakely's sentence under the Washington State Sentencing Guidelines was imposed in a manner inconsistent with the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, the decision threatens the operation of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and the presumptive sentencing systems in fourteen states. In Parts I and II of this article, we address how Blakely has affected the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, and how assistant U.S. attorneys, federal public defenders, and district and appellate court judges might proceed in a post-Blakely world. In …

Felony Jury Sentencing In Practice: A Three-State Study, Nancy J. King, Rosevelt L. Noble

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Jury sentencing in non-capital cases is one of the least understood procedures in contemporary American criminal justice. This Article looks beyond idealized visions of jury sentencing to examine for the first time how felony jury sentencing actually operates in three different states - Kentucky, Virginia, and Arkansas. Dozens of interviews with prosecutors, defenders, and judges, as well as an analysis of state sentencing data, reveal that this neglected corner of state criminal justice provides a unique window through which one can observe some of the most fundamental forces operating in criminal adjudication today. It turns out that jury sentencing in …

Lawrence And Garner: The Love (Or At Least Sexual Attraction) That Finally Dared Speak Its Name, Paris R. Baldacci

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article examines the legal evolution from *Bowers v. Hardwick* to Lawrence v. Texas, highlighting how the latter marked a pivotal shift in recognizing LGBTQ+ rights by emphasizing personal autonomy and dignity. It underscores the significance of narrative strategies in shaping judicial decisions, particularly in *Lawrence*, where the plaintiffs' personal stories influenced the Court's ruling.

Aedpa's "Adjudication On The Merits" Requirement: Collateral Review, Federalism, And Comity, Robert D. Sloane

Faculty Scholarship

The modern law of federal habeas corpus is a labyrinth of counterfactuals and arcane procedural hurdles that few state petitioners manage to navigate-as Justice Blackmun once wrote less charitably in dissent, "a Byzantine morass of arbitrary, unnecessary, and unjustifiable impediments to the vindication of federal rights." The convoluted inquiries required arise from the need to reconcile three developments of the past four decades that remain in tension with one another: first, the Warren Court's expansion of federal habeas relief, identified with Fay v. Noia and its progeny; second, the Burger and Rehnquist Courts' curtailment of that expansion, identified with Wainwright …

The Trial Court's Gatekeeper Role Under Frye, Daubert, And Kumho: A Special Look At Children's Cases, John Eric Smithburn

Journal Articles

The typical requisites for receiving testimony from an expert witness are that the expert be qualified in a particular subject or area of expertise, that the expert testify in opinion form or otherwise, which will help the fact finder, and that there be a proper basis for the expert's testimony. This article examines the changing meaning in the law of evidence of the expert's subject area in cases involving children. During most of the last century, where the expert witness proposed to testify concerning a new or novel scientific system, process or technique, the court applied the rule of Frye …

What Happens When Dirty Harry Becomes An [Expert] Witness For The Prosecution?, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Future Of American Sentencing: A National Roundtable On Blakely, Ronald J. Allen, Albert Alschuler, Douglas A. Berman, Stephanos Bibas, Frank O. Bowman Iii, Daniel P. Blank, Charles R. Breyer, Steven Chanenson, Michael R. Dreeben, Margareth Etienne, Jeffrey L. Fisher, Patrick Keenan, Joseph E. Kennedy, Nancy J. King, Susan J. Klein, Rory K. Little, Marc L. Miller, J. Bradley O'Connell, David Porter, Kevin R. Reitz, Daniel C. Richman, Kate Stith, Barbara Tombs, Richard B. Walker, Robert Weisberg, Robert F. Wright Jr., Jonathan Wroblewski, David N. Yellen

Faculty Scholarship

In the wake of the dramatic Supreme Court decision in Blakely v. Washington, Stanford Law School convened an assembly of the most eminent academic and professional sentencing experts in the country to jointly assess the meaning of the decision and its implications for federal and state sentencing reform. The event took place on October 8 and 9, just a few months after Blakely came down and the very week that the Supreme Court heard the arguments in United States v. Booker and United States v. Fanfan, the cases that will test Blakely's application to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Thus the …

Punishment, Guilt, And Shame In Biblical Thought, George P. Fletcher

Faculty Scholarship

The centrality of guilt in the criminal law provides puzzling perspective in the perennial debate on the nature and purpose of punishment. Why is it that all legal systems use this highly charged moral term to refer to an essential component of liability to punishment? This question is not easily answered. The reliance on the concept of guilt in the criminal law is suffused with paradox and mystery.

Crawford V. Washington: The Supreme Court Opts For A New (Old?) Approach To The Confrontation Clause, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Obstructing Justice: The Rise And Fall Of The Aedpa

San Diego Law Review

From 1994 through as late as August 2001, the United States intelligence community1

received information that terrorists had seriously contemplated using airplanes as instruments for carrying out international terrorist attacks.2

This method of attack was clearly “discussed in terrorist circles,” yet community analysts demonstrated little effort to strategically counter such terrorist groups. Moreover, in 1998, U.S. intelligence received specific information that “a group of unidentified Arabs planned to fly an explosive-laden plane from a foreign country into the World Trade Center.” In July 2001, senior government officials were warned of “a significant terrorist attack against U.S. and/or Israeli interests in …

The Forgotten Constitutional Right To Present A Defense And Its Impact On The Acceptance Of Responbilility-Entrapment Debate, Katrice Bridges Copeland

Faculty Scholarship

This Note argues that Section 3E1.1 of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines must be interpreted to allow defendants who claim entrapment at trial to remain eligible for the acceptance-of-responsibility adjustment. To interpret Section 3E1.1 in any other way would run afoul of defendants' constitutional right to present a defense. Part I argues that the entrapment defense does not put factual guilt at issue; instead the entrapment defense challenges whether the statute should apply to the defendant's conduct. Part II contends that the legislative intent in creating the sentencing guidelines in general and the acceptance-of-responsibility adjustment in particular are furthered by requiring …

Summary Of Browning V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 39, Nevada Law Journal

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a petition for post-conviction relief dismissed by the Eighth Judicial District Court, State of Nevada, finding that Petitioner “received effective assistance of counsel and that his other claims were procedurally barred.”

Summary Of Ebeling V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 50, Scott Whittemore

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The defendant contended that the district court erred in sentencing him on redundant convictions.

Summary Of Johnson V. State, Christina H. Wang

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, of two counts of uttering a forged instrument and one count of principal to commit uttering a forged instrument.

Summary Of Kaczmarek V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 37, James Davis

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a conviction and sentence of death by jury trial in the Eighth Judicial District Court, State of Nevada, finding the Petitioner “guilty of burglary, robbery, first-degree kidnapping, and first degree murder, all committed with the assistance of a child.”

Summary Of Lara V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 20, Hilary Barrett Muckleroy

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a district court order denying a post-conviction petition for a write of habeas corpus.

Summary Of Martinez V. State, Scott Whittemore

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Gina Martinez appealed a district court order denying her motion for return of money deposited as bail.

Summary Of Mcconnell V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 105, Nevada Law Journal

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appellant Robert McConnell murdered Brian Pierce in August 2002. The State of Nevada charged McConnell with first-degree murder and sought capital sentencing. The State alleged two theories: deliberate, premeditated murder and felony murder during the perpetration of a burglary. McConnell represented himself, pleaded guilty to first-degree murder, and presented a case in mitigation at his penalty hearing. The jury returned a sentence of death. Initially, McConnell moved to waive his appeal but eventually reconsidered and authorized counsel to fully brief all issues on appeal. Specifically, McConnell challenged the propriety of his penalty hearing and death sentence on various grounds. The …

Summary Of Means V. State, 120 Nev. Adv. Op. 101, Justin L. Carley

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Clyde Means was charged with one count of open or gross lewdness and three counts of sexual assault upon his nineteen year old son. At trial, the jury was empaneled but the district court conducted a hearing to determine the admissibility of Means’ prior bad acts. Because the district court ruled that the acts were admissible, Means, through his attorneys, negotiated a plea bargain. Means would plead guilty to one count of sexual assault in exchange for dismissal of the other charges. Means was informed that he would face two to twenty years in prison, fines, and be required to …