Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Crimmigration: How It Can Protect Immigrant Rights, Aspen Griffing

Criminal Law Society Blog

“Crimmigration: How it Can Protect Immigrant Rights,” addresses the expansion of Immigration and Customs Enforcement under the Trump II Administration and its impact on the immigrant community in the United States. This Article recognizes the punitive nature that civil immigration proceedings, oftentimes posing consequences as severe as those in criminal proceedings. As such, this Article proposes a procedural concept of “crimmigration” to protect immigrant rights. A “crimmigration” framework would offer immigrants the right to Miranda warnings, prompt judicial determinations of probable cause, the right to a speedy trial, and the right to appeal, among other protections. While the harms caused …

Causes, Effects, And Solutions Of Wrongful Convictions, Allison B. Gobuzzi

Honors Theses

This study examines the wrongful conviction of Anthony Hinton and other examples that illustrate the causes of wrongful convictions in the United States and the effects that wrongful convictions have on the wrongfully accused and their families. This study uses research from scholarly articles and legal cases to analyze the factors that contribute to wrongful convictions and the impact on the wrongfully accused and their families. The research concludes that wrongful convictions are frequently the result of both evidentiary and procedural issues within the criminal justice system.

Glossip’S Road Map To Nowhere, Vida Johnson

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in Glossip v. Oklahoma was heralded as a victory for the defense. This essay argues that the 2025 Glossip decision does little to fix the myriad problems that led to Mr. Glossip’s wrongful conviction. While ultimately the Supreme Court reached the correct outcome this time, the ordinary judicial process and its purported safeguards were not what saved Mr. Glossip’s life. Rather, it was random chance that came to Mr. Glossip’s aid.

Ten years earlier, the Supreme Court, with many of the same Justices on the bench now, paved the way for Mr. Glossip’s execution. The …

Evaluasi Terhadap Undang-Undang Pemilu Dan Peraturan Pelaksanaannya Kearah Penyempurnaan Sistim Pemilu, M. Riza Sihbudi

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

Abstract

Aspek Yuridis Pemutusan Hubungan Kerja Di Perusahaan Swasta, Abdul Bari Azed

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

Abstract

Facing The Accused: The Confrontation Clause And Protecting Child Victims Of Sexual Abuse, Raquel Pearson

Idaho Law Review

The Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause provides individuals the right to confront witnesses testifying against them. For decades, Idaho case law has grappled with the delicate balance between protecting victims of sexual assault and upholding defendants’ rights to cross examine their accusers. This delicate balance is further exacerbated when sexual assault cases involve minors, particularly in deciding whether victim statements implicate the Confrontation Clause. The Idaho Supreme Court considers the totality of the circumstances when evaluating whether a defendant’s right to confront a witness has been violated, but the standard for when the Clause is triggered remains unclear.

This Note seeks …

Engineered For Surveillance: Public Safety, Roadway Science, And The Fourth Amendment, Trayce Hockstad, Steven Jones

Idaho Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Death Penalty & State Executions In The Mountain West, 1976 - 2024, Mia Tschan, Sydney Mitchell, Yiselle Olivas Ruiz, Dre Boyd-Weatherly, Olivia K. Cheche, Kristian Thymianos, Caitlin J. Saladino, William E. Brown Jr.

Criminal Justice

This fact sheet presents 1976-2024 data on the death penalty and state executions in the five Mountain West states of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, and Utah. The Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) report, “State Execution Rates,” includes data on the 36 states that have conducted state executions and the 38 states, federal government, and military institutions that imposed the death penalty between 1976 and 2024. This fact sheet focuses on cumulative executions, executions per capita, and executions per death sentence in each Mountain West state.

Delusions Of Judicial Grandeur: State V. Wierson And The Return To Statutory Sanity, Max Jordan Katz

Mercer Law Review

Georgia’s insanity defenses have long reflected tension between accountability and mental illness. The State’s statutory framework, which preserves both a “mental incapacity” and “delusional compulsion” defense, reflects this tension. Yet for decades, the Supreme Court of Georgia’s decision in Bailey v. State imposed a judicial limitation: a defendant who “brought about” her own delusion through voluntary acts or omissions could not claim insanity. The court’s recent decision in State v. Wierson marks a turning point. In Wierson, the court considered whether noncompliance with psychiatric medication preempts the defendant from invoking statutory insanity defenses. Rejecting Bailey, the court reasserted the primacy …

Deliberately Silenced, Rachel Kincaid

Mercer Law Review

The Prison Litigation Reform Act is celebrating its 30^th birthday this year. It was designed to make it harder for incarcerated people to file lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of their conditions of confinement and to restrict their remedies even when they do so successfully. It has been wildly effective at achieving those objectives. It has also propped up mass incarceration and facilitated the persistence of dismal conditions of confinement in carceral facilities in the United States.

The PLRA’s exhaustion requirement—arguably its most damaging provision—silences carceral voices without regard for the merit of their complaints. It does so by mandating …

The Expanding Digital Border: Ai, Surveillance, And The Fight For Justice, James Chesser

Immigration and Human Rights Law Review

As artificial intelligence transforms the mechanisms of immigration control, the modern border has become a digital filter—one governed less by geography and more by code. This Article examines the legal, technical, and ethical implications of AI-driven systems now central to global border enforcement, including biometric surveillance, algorithmic risk scoring, and predictive profiling. It explores how states use these technologies not only to manage irregular migration, but to compete for global talent—constructing migration regimes that reward capital and compliance while eroding transparency, due process, and equality.

Through an international and comparative lens, the piece highlights the expansion of algorithmic decision-making across …

The Evasive Epidemic Of Missing Black Children, Trinity D. Garlick

Criminal Law Society Blog

The Evasive Epidemic of Missing Black Children” brings to light the disproportionately low amount of media support for missing Black Children. It draws on examples of missing Black Children, like Adam Walsh and other Atlanta Black children, to illustrate how Black children have gone ignored by the public for too long. It discusses factors such as failure of state legislatures, lack of media exposure, unfair and racial fixed labels, and law enforcement discretionary conduct, as the leading drivers of the epidemic of missing Black children. This Article then dives into efforts to reform the American system to adequately address when …

Perang Irak- Iran Mengancam Keamanan Pelayaran Kapal Negara Netral, Rusdi Malik, S.H.

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

Abstract

Advokat Dan Penegakan Hukum Dalam Perspektif Peradilan Pidana, Luhut M.P. Pangaribuan, S.H.

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

Abstract

Minimal Success: The Consequences Of Mandatory Minimums In Youth Sentencing, Maya Chrobot

Fordham Law Review

In New York State, children as young as thirteen can be processed as adults and sentenced to mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory minimum sentences require judges to sentence the defendant to a statutorily set minimum term of imprisonment. Practitioners, judges, and researchers question the efficacy of mandatory minimum sentences, finding that they are ineffective at deterring crime, decreasing bias in sentencing, and increasing community safety. Additionally, there is clear evidence about the damaging effects of incarceration on young adults. Instead of functioning as rehabilitative punishment, incarceration leads young adults to experience poor mental and physical health outcomes upon release, and they …

Fit To Be Tried By Jury, But Not To Be A Juror: The Dilemma Faced By “Adults” Under Age 21, Kenneth Bell

SLU Law Journal Online

This article, “A Time To Speak: A Lifer’s Assessment of the Sentence of Death by Imprisonment” appeared in the 2025 Special Edition of The Writer’s Block under the longer title, “A Time To Speak: A Lifer’s Assessment of the Sentence of Death by Imprisonment and the Application of Roper v. Simmons and Miller v. Alabama.”  It is a four part discussion of the nature and continued viability of the sentence of life without parole particularly the need to end the imposition of that sentence upon persons between the ages of eighteen and twenty-one, i.e., emerging adults. This shorter piece extends …

Drawing Lines In The Substance: Questioning The Inconsistent Application Of West Virginia's Recidivist Statute In Cases Involving Controlled Substance Violations, Patrick Hassen

West Virginia Law Review

For decades, West Virginia’s recidivist statute required courts to sentence repeat felony offenders to life in prison even if their offenses were not violent. Over the years, the statute mandated life sentences for triggering offenses as minor as writing a bad check or failing to register a new phone number with the police. Unsurprisingly, the statute has come under its fair share of constitutional attack for violating the state Constitution’s proportionality principle. In 1981 the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia held the state’s proportionality principle requires a strict interpretation of the recidivist statute in favor of the defendant. …

Harmless In Name Only: Prosecutorial Misconduct And The Right To A Fair Trial, Jennifer Brinkman

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

Prosecutorial misconduct during trial—particularly improper questioning of witnesses and improper argument—occurs in front of the jury and directly shapes its deliberations. Yet appellate courts routinely dismiss such misconduct as “harmless error,” allowing convictions to stand even when prosecutors violate defendants’ rights. This Article contends that the harmless error framework both underestimates the impact of misconduct on jurors and undermines the Constitutional guarantee of a fair trial. It proposes that certain instances of misconduct that occur during trial should be classified as structural error, requiring automatic reversal. This would protect defendants’ right to a fair trial and maintain the integrity of …

Reel It In: Untangling The Circuit Split On The Constitutionality Of Geofence Warrants Under The Fourth Amendment, Kate P. Risser

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

This Note examines geofence warrants and their ongoing threat to constitutionally protected rights such as privacy, speech, and assembly. Part I will provide background information on geofence warrants and examine the prominent justifications for the use of the warrants. Part II will examine how law enforcement’s use of geofence warrants threatens citizens’ constitutionally protected fundamental rights like privacy and reproductive rights. Specifically, Part II addresses how geofence warrants disproportionately target and affect women, people of color, and low-income individuals. Part III will detail the history of the Fourth Amendment tracing its roots to before the Founding Era then exploring applicable …

Rethinking Objectivity: The Problem Of Pretext In The Fourth Amendment, Monu S. Bedi

Indiana Law Journal

Pretextual encounters continue to erode the legitimacy of the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. Simply put, a police officer can act on personal bias or animus as long as the search or seizure is deemed “objectively reasonable.” Numerous scholars (e.g., Bennett Capers, Gabriel Chin, and David Harris) have critiqued this objective standard, contending it perpetuates discriminatory practices, particularly against communities of color. The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg herself suggested that the Court might need to reconsider the legal precedent she helped establish. More recently, Orin Kerr has also argued that the Court’s reliance on objective determinations is inconsistent with …