Legal Profession Commons^™

Amending For Justice’S Sake: Codified Disclosure Rule Needed To Provide Guidance To Prosecutor’S Duty To Disclose, Nathan A. Frazier

Florida Law Review

This Note argues for the implementation of bright-line rules to guide prosecutorial discretion. It urges a solution that identifies the salient facts from the case law and enumerates those facts into a codified Strickler three-prong standard. A bright-line standard should exist requiring disclosure when any of the following scenarios are present: (1) Prior perjury or false testimony of a government witness; (2) Promises of immunity to a government witness; (3) Monetary rewards to key government witnesses; (4) Mental impairments of a government witness; (5) Information reflecting bias or prejudice of a government witness against defendant; (6) Confessions to the crime …

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines’ Abuse Of Trust Enhancement: An Argument For The Professional Discretion Approach, Adam Denver Griffin

Florida Law Review

This Note analyzes the prevalent judicial approaches to § 3B1.3 and explains how some courts erred by advancing the hybrid approach after the 1993 Amendment to § 3B1.3. Part II examines the role of trust in guideline sentencing. Part III discusses the policy behind the Guidelines, including the continuing application of the Guidelines despite the Supreme Court’s 2005 United States v. Booker decision. Part IV explains different approaches employed by the circuit courts to define a position of trust. Part V highlights the effect of the approach by contrasting the Third Circuit’s hybrid with the Eleventh Circuit’s professional discretion approach. …

Longitudinal Guilt: Repeat Offenders, Plea Bargaining, And The Variable Standard Of Proof, Russell D. Covey

Florida Law Review

This Article introduces a new concept—“longitudinal guilt”—which invites readers to reconsider basic presuppositions about the way our criminal justice system determines guilt in criminal cases. In short, the idea is that a variety of features of criminal procedure, most importantly, plea bargaining, conspire to change the primary “truthfinding mission” of criminal law from one of adjudicating individual historical cases to one of identifying dangerous “offenders.” This change of mission is visible in the lower proof standards we apply to repeat criminal offenders.

The first section of this Article explains how plea bargaining and graduated sentencing systems based on criminal history …

The Grand Jury Subpoena: Is It The Prosecutor's "Ultimate Weapon" Against Defense Attorneys And Their Clients?, Tara A. Flanagan

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mandatory Disclosure: California Bar Refuses To Adopt Proposed Rule To Confront Client Perjury , David B. Wasson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Minding The Court: Enhancing The Decision-Making Process, Pamela Casey, Kevin Burke, Steve Leben

Faculty Works

A compelling and growing body of research from the fields of cognitive psychology and neuroscience provides important insights about how we process information and make decisions. This research has great potential significance for judges, who spend much of their time making decisions of great importance to others. For most judges, this research literature is not part of their judicial education. This article reviews cutting edge research about decision making and discusses its implications for helping judges and those who work with them produce fair processes and just outcomes. It builds on a 2007 American Judges Association paper that encouraged judges …

Reassessing The Citizens Protection Act: A Good Thing It Passed, And A Good Thing It Failed, Rima Sirota

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Citizens Protection Act (CPA) of 1998 has always been a lightening rod for criticism, and it remains so today. This article reassesses the CPA’s perceived inadequacies in light of how it has actually affected (or, not affected) federal prosecutors’ involvement in criminal investigations. The article takes issue with the critics and demonstrates that the CPA succeeded where it should have, failed where it should have, and left us—however inadvertently—with a remarkably coherent and consistent approach to regulating federal prosecutors’ involvement in criminal investigations regardless of whether a suspect retains counsel early in the proceedings.

The CPA requires federal prosecutors …

Prescriptions For Ethical Blindness: Improving Advocacy For Indigent Defendants In Criminal Cases, Tigran W. Eldred

Faculty Scholarship

The reasons criminal lawyers so often fail to provide adequate legal representation to indigent defendants are well-­known: severe underfunding, excessive workloads, and other disincentives for competent representation work together to encourage quick disposition of cases, with little regard for the quality of legal services that are provided. Yet, largely overlooked in this equation is whether defense lawyers who provide subpar representation are aware of their own shortcomings. To answer this question, this Article focuses on the psychology of ethical decision making. Relying on research that reveals the subtle ways that self-­interest can cause people to overlook unethical behavior, it argues …

Motivation Matters: Guideline 10.13 And Other Mechanisms For Preventing Lawyers From Surrendering To Self-Interest In Responding To Allegations Of Ineffective Assistance In Death Penalty Cases, Tigran W. Eldred

Faculty Scholarship

Defense lawyers whose clients are sentenced to death are virtually guaranteed to be accused of ineffective assistance of counsel. The question is how they will respond. On one hand, lawyers alleged to be ineffective are obligated under Guideline 10.13 of the American Bar Association’s Guidelines for the Appointment and Performance of Defense Counsel in Death Penalty Cases to continue to safeguard the interests of their former clients, a duty that includes full cooperation in appropriate legal strategies chosen to pursue the ineffectiveness claim. On the other hand, lawyers who are accused of ineffectiveness often react defensively to the allegation, reflexively …

Gideon At Guantánamo, Neal K. Katyal

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The right to counsel maintains an uneasy relationship with the demands of trials for war crimes. Drawing on the author’s personal experiences from defending a Guantánamo detainee, the Author explains how Gideon set a baseline for the right to counsel at Guantánamo. Whether constitutionally required or not, Gideon ultimately framed the way defense lawyers represented their clients. Against the expectations of political and military leaders, both civilian and military lawyers vigorously challenged the legality of the military trial system. At the same time, tensions arose because lawyers devoted to a particular cause (such as attacking the Guantánamo trial system) were …

A Power And A Duty: Prosecutorial Discretion And Obligation In United States Sentencing Guideline § 3e1.1(B), Laura Waters

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Right To Waive Competent Counsel: Extending The Faretta Waiver, Augustine Gerard Yee

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Milking The New Sacred Cow: The Supreme Court Limits The Peremptory Challenge On Racial Grounds In Powers V. Ohio And Edmonson V. Leesville Concrete Co., Bradley R. Kirk

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prosecutors And Professional Regulation, Bruce A. Green

Faculty Scholarship

Prosecutors often express mistrust of professional regulators, their rules and their processes. This may have been more understandable twenty years ago, when prosecutors perceived that the organized bar had been captured by defense lawyers seeking to use professional regulation as a means of imposing limits on criminal investigative authority that the law did not otherwise recognize. Although that criticism no longer has much basis in reality, it has persisted in the rhetoric prosecutors employ in advocacy regarding their professional conduct. This article explores prosecutors’ public attitude toward professional regulation, beginning with a brief account of their responses two decades ago, …

The Master Mason: How Professor Baldus Built A Bridge From Learning To Law And The Legacy Of Equal Justice He Leaves Behind, James E. Baker

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

These are Chief Judge Baker’s remarks eulogizing the late Professor David Baldus. Chief Judge Baker observes that Professor Baldus was an extraordinary educator-lawyer who mastered the fields of social science and statistics. He adds that Professor Baldus was diligent in his research and strived to make the law accessible. Chief Judge Baker discusses how Professor Baldus’s research on the death penalty and proportionality review successfully bridged the law and learning, without ever losing sight of compassion.

Up Against The Wall: A Guide To The Effective Screening Of Former Government Attorneys In New York, Shira Mizrahi

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The note examines New York Rule of Professional Conduct 1.11, which governs conflicts of interest for former government attorneys transitioning to private practice. It highlights the rule's strict requirements for screening to prevent conflicts and the "appearance of impropriety" standard, which allows courts to disqualify firms even without evidence of wrongdoing. The analysis critiques the rule's effectiveness, particularly in small firms, and proposes reforms to balance public trust, client interests, and attorneys' career mobility.

Criminal Acts & Ethical Dilemmas: Some Client Nightmares Sneak Up On You, Barbara Glesner Fines

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

The Illusory Right To Counsel, Eve Brensike Primus

Articles

Imagine a woman wrongly accused of murdering her fiance. She is arrested and charged with first-degree murder. If convicted, she faces a mandatory sentence of life without the possibility of parole. Her family scrapes together enough money to hire two attorneys to represent her at trial. There is no physical evidence connecting her to the murder, but the prosecution builds its case on circumstantial inferences. Her trial attorneys admit that they were so cocky and confident that she would be acquitted that they did not bother to investigate her case or file a single pre-trial motion. Rather, they waived the …

Organizational Guidelines For The Prosecutor's Office, Rachel E. Barkow

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Beyond Training Prosecutors About Their Disclosure Obligations: Can Prosecutors' Offices Learn From Their Lawyers' Mistakes?, Bruce A. Green

Cardozo Law Review

Prosecutors, criminal defense lawyers, judges, and legal academics from around the country recently met at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York to discuss prosecutors' compliance with their disclosure obligations. The overarching question was how prosecutors' offices could do a better job. To assist representatives of the legal profession in approaching this question from new directions, the Symposium organizers invited speakers from outside the legal profession to talk about the causes of error and methods used to reduce error in other contexts. One of the themes was that, outside the practice of law, individuals and institutions learn …

New Perspectives On Brady And Other Disclosure Obligations: Report Of The Working Groups On Best Practices

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Fool For A Client: Competency Standards In Pro Se Cases , Reed Willis

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

International Bridges To Justice (Ibj) - Criminal Defence Training, Lien Centre For Social Innovation

Social Space

Criminal justice systems across the world continue to be plagued by problems such as arbitrary detention, torture and an inadequate knowledge of the rights of defendants. IBJ hopes to establish a legal resource hub for criminal defenders and justice practitioners across Asia by taking a collaborative and proactive approach with Asian governments and fostering leadership and innovation in the area of criminal justice reform.

Rereading Rauscher Is It Time For The United States To Abandon The Rule Of Specialty, Mark A. Summers

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Psychology Of Conflicts Of Interest In Criminal Cases, Tigran W. Eldred

Faculty Scholarship

This article demonstrates that current Sixth Amendment jurisprudence fails to account for how defense lawyers respond to conflicts of interest in criminal cases. Too often, the Supreme Court has made assumptions about the behavior of defense lawyers without empirical support. The result has been a confusing doctrinal landscape, which both relies upon and questions the ability of defense lawyers to address and resolve conflicts of interest.

This article fills the gap in existing literature by viewing conflicts of interest in criminal cases through the prism of behavioral economics. The research reveals that defense lawyers are subject to psychological biases that …

Peering Into The Judicial Magic Eight Ball: Arbitrary Decisions In The Area Of Juror Removal, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 813 (2009), Kimberly Wise

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Toward Ethical Plea Bargaining, Erica Hashimoto

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dedication To Professor Timothy P. O'Neill, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. Xxv (2008), Kathryn J. Kennedy

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreword, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. Xxvii (2008), Nancee Alexa Barth

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fixed Justice: Reforming Plea-Bargaining With Plea-Based Ceilings, Russell D. Covey

Faculty Publications By Year

The ubiquity of plea bargaining creates real concern that innocent defendants are occasionally, or perhaps even routinely, pleading guilty to avoid coercive trial sentences. Pleading guilty is a rational choice for defendants as long as prosecutors offer plea discounts so substantial that trial is not a rational strategy regardless of guilt or innocence. The long-recognized solution to this problem is to enforce limits on the size of the plea/trial sentencing differential. As a practical matter, however, discount limits are unenforceable if prosecutors retain ultimate discretion over charge selection and declination. Because the doctrine of prosecutorial charging discretion is immune to …