Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Identifying Criminals’ Risk Preferences, Murat C. Mungan, Jonathan Klick

Faculty Scholarship

There is a 250-year-old presumption in the criminology and law enforcement literature that people are deterred more by increases in the certainty rather than increases in the severity of legal sanctions. We call this presumption the Certainty Aversion Presumption (CAP). Simple criminal decision-making models suggest that criminals must be risk seeking if they behave consistently with CAP. This implication leads to disturbing interpretations, such as criminals being categorically different from law-abiding people, who often display risk-averse behavior while making financial decisions. Moreover, policy discussions that incorrectly rely on criminals’ risk attitudes implied by CAP are ill informed, and may therefore …

#Guilty? Sublet V. State And The Authentication Of Social Media Evidence In Criminal Proceedings, Elizabeth A. Flanagan

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Pennsylvania Stacks The Deck Against Defendants In Commonwealth V. Alicia, Leaving False Confession Assessments To The Jury, Katherine Reamy

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Retroactivity In Criminal Procedure, Dov Fox, Alex Stein

Washington Law Review

The “watershed” doctrine gives prisoners a constitutional basis to reopen their cases based on a new due process protection that would have made a difference had it been announced before their appeals were exhausted. The Supreme Court has imposed nearly impossible conditions, however, for any new rule of criminal procedure to apply retroactively to a final conviction or sentence. No such rule can be backdated unless it enhances not only the accuracy of criminal verdicts, but also “our very understanding of the bedrock” tenets of fairness in criminal trials. The Court refers to rules that satisfy both these requirements as …

When Is A Trafficking Victim A Trafficking Victim? Anti-Prostitution Statutes And Victim Protection, Michele Boggiani

Cleveland State Law Review

Victims of sex-market trafficking are often criminalized under anti-prostitution statutes rather than protected under anti-trafficking laws. As a result, trafficking victims suffer ramifications resulting from both the exploitation of their captors and the social stigma of criminalization. The combined hardships make it exponentially more difficult for victims to overcome their past and safely reintegrate into society. This Article first identifies the sources of the double-victimization problem, including the perpetuated stereotypes regarding trafficking victims and the methods of exploitation, inadequate law enforcement training, and statutes that conflate sex-market victims with prostitution. Having identified the source of the problem, the author proposes …

Taming The Wild West: Using Unsecured Bail Bonds In Nevada's Pretrial-Release Program, Hayley E. Miller

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Habeas As Forum Allocation: A New Synthesis, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The scope of habeas relief for state prisoners, especially during the decades before the Supreme Court’s 1953 decision in Brown v. Allen, is a famously disputed question – one of recognized significance for contemporary debates about the proper scope of habeas review. This Essay provides a new answer. It argues that, until the enactment of AEDPA in 1996, state prisoners were always entitled to de novo review of the legal and mixed law/fact questions decided against them by the state courts. Until 1916, such review was provided by the Supreme Court; after 1953, such review was provided by the lower …

Rescued From The Grave And Then Covered With Mud: Justice Scalia And The Unfinished Restoration Of The Confrontation Right, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

Some years before his death, when asked which was his favorite among his opinions, Antonin Scalia named Crawford v. Washington. It was a good choice. Justice Scalia's opinion in Crawford reclaimed the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution and restored it to its rightful place as one of the central protections of our criminal justice system. He must have found it particularly satisfying that the opinion achieved this result by focusing on the historical meaning of the text, and that it gained the concurrence of all but two members of the Court, from all ideological positions.

The United States Supreme Court (Mostly) Gives Up Its Review Role With Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel Cases, Paul Marcus

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Jurisdiction Of The Irish Courts In The Protection Of The Constitutional Rights Of A Person Accused Of A Crime., Adrian Berski

Reports

Studying the Irish Constitutional Law, requires the understanding of how the Irish Political System was evolved. Montesquieu's tripartite system, adopted by the Republic of Ireland is the judiciary[1] has a particular place in the Irish Constitution in articles 34 - 37[2].

The main purpose of this essay is to analyse the balance between the jurisdiction of the Irish Courts in the protection of the constitutional rights of a person accused of a crime and the functioning of the criminal justice system in protecting Society`s general interest. The first section presents a brief summary of the courts functions …

The Supreme Court Didn't Fix Racist Jury Selection, Kami Chavis

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Juvenile Justice Reform In Texas: The Context, Content & Consequences Of Senate Bill 1630, Sara A. Gordon

Journal of Legislation

No abstract provided.

If You Fly A Drone, So Can Police, Stephen Henderson

Other Faculty Publications

Written for Slate's Future Tense.According to the U.S. Constitution, the more you fly your drone, the more police can fly theirs. “Come on,” you might reply, “that hoary document”—and, yes, sorry to make you the sort who drops words like hoary—“that hoary document surely says nothing about drones.” But in fact it does. At least it does as interpreted by the courts. In particular, it is how they interpret the Fourth Amendment. So, to understand this aspect of drones, we first must understand this provision of the Bill of Rights...

Beyond A Reasonable Disagreement: Judging Habeas Corpus, Noam Biale

University of Cincinnati Law Review

This Article addresses ongoing confusion in federal habeas corpus doctrine about one of the most elemental concepts in law: reasonableness. The Supreme Court recently announced a new standard of reasonableness review for habeas cases, intended to raise the bar state prisoners must overcome to obtain federal relief. This new standard demands that errors in state court decisions be so profound that “no fairminded jurist could disagree” that the result is incorrect. Scholars have decried the rigid and exacting nature of this standard, but very little interpretive work has yet been done to theorize what it means and how it should …

Protecting Public Employee Trial Testimony, Joseph Deloney

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In a number of jurisdictions around the United States, police officers and other public employees that regularly testify as part of their ordinary job duties can be placed in compromising positions. Because these types of employees regularly testify as part of their ordinary job duties, such testimony is considered “employee speech” and therefore unprotected by the First Amendment. Consequently, governmental employers can take adverse employment actions against an employee based on his or her truthful trial testimony without violating the employee’s First Amendment rights. Drawing from the Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Lane v. Franks and other circuit court cases, …

West Germany’S Eastern Policy: Legal Claims And Political Realities, Manfred Zuleeg

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Judicial Recusation In The Federal Republic Of Germany, Sigmund A. Cohn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Police And Gangs: Undergraduates’ Perceptions Of The Similarities And Differences, Seroyah Williams

Honors College Theses

Police have been said to be the largest gang in America with badges. With recent events occurring throughout the United States, including police shootings of unarmed citizens, some may say that the police have shown various characteristics similar to those of gangs. Does the public also view officers, in general, in the same perspective? Surveys were administered to a large class of Georgia Southern University students to acquire their perceptions of both the police and gangs. Each student listed characteristics of the police and gangs, their opinion, and different ways those perceptions have been formed. The data collected revealed more …

The Languishing Public Safety Doctrine, Brian Gallini

School of Law Faculty Publications and Presentations

Every semester, law students across the country read New York v. Quarles in criminal procedure. The Supreme Court’s 1984 decision in Quarles established the public safety exception—the first and only exception to the requirements of Miranda v. Arizona. But at the time of Quarles’s issuance, no one could have predicted just how long it would sit untouched by the Supreme Court. Application of Quarles to high profile defendants like James Holmes and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev illustrate the need for more clarity in the context of applying the public safety exception.Mores specifically, those cases demonstrate why the Supreme Court needs to re-examine …

A Call For Justice: Virginia's Need For Criminal Discovery Reform, Douglas A. Ramseur

Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest

In order for the promise of a strong and reliable criminal justice system to work properly in Virginia, there must be strong and prepared advocates on both sides of the process. The current process of discovery for criminal cases in Virginia fosters a culture of secrecy and unpreparedness that should not be tolerated in a system that has such power over the lives of every person in this state. It is far past the time for Virginia to move forward on criminal discovery reform. The current rules for criminal discovery in Virginia were first adopted in 1972. The rules do …