Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons^™

Deterrence, David Crump

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

The Ambulance Chasing Epidemic In Texas, Ronald Rodriguez

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

Barratry and solicitation of professional employment is illegal and unethical. The Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct define barratry as ethical misconduct and a serious crime. Unfortunately, for citizens and law-abiding attorneys of Texas, the criminal and ethical prohibitions against barratry have rarely been enforced. Consequently, barratry continues to proliferate rapidly throughout South Texas. For lawyers who engage in this unethical practice, the potential for large financial gain proves irresistible given the virtually nonexistent risk of prosecution. The lack of robust and successful prosecutions has created an optimal environment for barratry to proliferate. This Article discusses the current barratry epidemic …

The Unconstitutional Application Of Apprehension And Detention Laws: Section 236(C) Of The Immigration And Nationality Act, Rigoberto Ledesma

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

Resolving Civil Forfeiture Disputes, Rishi Batra

Faculty Articles

Under a legal process known as civil asset forfeiture, state and federal laws allow law enforcement officials and the government to seize assets from individuals who are not charged with a crime if the property is suspected of being involved in criminal activity. This is true even if the owner of the property is not charged with the underlying crime. Indeed, in 2014, The Washington Post analyzed 400 cases in seventeen states that were examples of civil forfeiture during traffic stops. Police stopped motorists under the pretext of a minor traffic infraction, analyzed the intentions of motorists by assessing nervousness, …

Blue Lives Have Always Mattered: The Usurping Of Hate Crime Laws For An Unintended And Unnecessary Purpose, Lisa M. Olson

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

Exploring The Conflicts Within Carceral Feminism: A Call To Revocalize The Women Who Continue To Suffer, Krishna De La Cruz

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

An Analysis Of Austin Lawyers Guild V. Securus Technologies, Inc.: The Constitutional And Ethical Implications Of Using Illegally Recorded Attorney–Client Telephone Conversations As Derivative Evidence, Christina Santos

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

For the justice system to operate effectively, privileged communications between an attorney and his or her client should be afforded the utmost and strictest protections. Intrusion by law enforcement upon these communications severely diminishes the confidence and candor needed in the attorney-client relationship. Although the United States Supreme Court recognizes prosecutorial immunity and generally leaves prosecutorial discipline to state bar authorities, the Court has long held that the attorney-client privilege is needed for attorneys to effectively advocate on behalf of their clients.

Austin Lawyers Guild v. Securus Technologies, Inc., a civil class-action lawsuit, is currently pending before the United …

Fourth Amendment Implications Of Police-Worn Body Cameras, Erik Nielsen

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

Filming The Police: An Interference Or A Public Service, Aracely Rodman

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

Regulating Law Enforcement's Use Of Drones: The Need For State Legislation, Michael L. Smith

Faculty Articles

The recent rise of domestic drone technology has prompted privacy advocates and members of the public to call for the regulation of the use of drones by law enforcement officers. Numerous states have proposed legislation to regulate government drone use, and thirteen have passed laws that restrict the use of drones by law enforcement agencies. Despite the activity in state legislatures, commentary on drones tends to focus on how courts, rather than legislative bodies, can restrict the government's use of drones. Commentators call for wider Fourth Amendment protections that would limit government surveillance. In the process, in-depth analysis of state …