Criminal Procedure Commons^™

The Frame Of Reference And Other Problems, Richard D. Friedman, Jeffrey L. Fisher

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

George argues that, centuries ago, jurists did not distinguish between testimonial and nontestimonial hearsay, and so the distinction cannot be a historically well-grounded basis for modern confrontation doctrine. The argument proceeds from an inaccurate frame of reference. When the confrontation right developed, principally in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and English defendants—Raleigh among them—demanded that adverse witnesses be brought face to face with them, they were making a procedural assertion as to how witnesses must give their testimony. (Giving testimony is what witnesses in litigation do.) Rarely did they phrase this claim in terms of hearsay, for the simple reason …

Speedy Trial As A Viable Challenge To Chronic Underfunding In Indigent-Defense Systems, Emily Rose

Michigan Law Review

Across the country, underresourced indigent-defense systems create delays in taking cases to trial at both the state and federal levels. Attempts to increase funding for indigent defense by bringing ineffective assistance of counsel claims have been thwarted by high procedural and substantive hurdles, and consequently these attempts have failed to bring significant change. This Note argues that, because ineffective assistance of counsel litigation is most likely a dead end for system-wide reform, indigent defenders should challenge the constitutionality of underfunding based on the Sixth Amendment guarantee of speedy trial. Existing speedy trial jurisprudence suggests that the overworking and furloughing of …

Ryan V. Gonzalez And The Potential Elimination Of The Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel Post Conviction Failsafe, Kathleen Carlson

Florida Law Review

Recently, the United States Supreme Court addressed in Ryan v. Gonzales “whether the incompetence of a state prisoner requires suspension of the prisoner’s federal habeas corpus proceedings.” In a unanimous decision, the Court held that “the Courts of Appeals for the Ninth and Sixth Circuits both erred in holding that district courts must stay federal habeas proceedings when petitioners are adjudged incompetent.” The decision leaves unanswered questions with regard to a petitioner’s ability to protect himself from ineffective or incompetent counsel both before and during the habeas proceeding.

The Extradition Proceedings Against General Augusto Pinochet: Is Justice Being Met Under International Law?, Anita C. Johnson

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Case Of Wang Zong Xiao V. Reno: The International Implications Of Prosecutorial Misconduct, William W. Tanner

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Refusal To Extradite: An Examination Of Canada's Indictment Of The American Legal System, Jami Leeson

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Brown V. Plata: Renewing The Call To End Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, Steven Nauman

Florida Law Review

After more than twenty years of litigation, the United States Supreme Court finally determined whether California’s overcrowded prison system created a constitutional violation in Brown v. Plata. With prisons and jails across the country operating at well over 100% capacity, the Court concluded what advocates had been screaming for over a decade: prison overcrowding cannot be tolerated, and the only remedy is to reduce prison populations. What the Court failed to resolve, however, was what the primary cause of prison overcrowding is and how states and the federal government are supposed to comply with capacity expectations amid concerns for …

Vicarious Aggravators, Sam Kamin, Justin Marceau

Florida Law Review

In Gregg v. Georgia, the Supreme Court held that the death penalty was constitutional so long as it provided a non-arbitrary statutory mechanism for determining who are the worst of the worst, and therefore, deserving of the death penalty. As a general matter, this process of narrowing the class of death eligible offenders is done through the codification of aggravating factors. If the jury finds beyond a reasonable doubt that one or more aggravating factors exists, then a defendant convicted of murder is eligible for the ultimate sentence. There is, however, a critical, unanswered, and under-theorized issue raised by …

School Shootings And Principals' Perception Of Armed Personnel In An Education Setting, Richard Reyes

Seton Hall University Dissertations and Theses (ETDs)

The purpose of this study was to explore the dilemma principals have in determining the best approach to provide safe environment for their students and faculty, while at the same time creating an environment that is conducive to education.

The study looked at an urban school district with a marginalized community with low socioeconomic status as identified by the District Factor Group A. Twelve school principals were interviewed to gather information of their perceptions in relation to having armed personnel in their schools.

The literature on school shootings and armed personnel in schools was reviewed. The literature consisted of peer-reviewed …

Crime Control, Due Process, & Evidentiary Exclusion: When Exceptions Become The Rule, Elizabeth H. Kaylor

Proceedings of the New York State Communication Association

This paper uses the dichotomy between Herbert Packer’s (1968) two models of criminal justice advocacy – “crime control” and “due process” – as a rhetorical paradigm for understanding policy debate about the exclusion of relevant evidence at trial. Understanding the opposition between crime control and due process advocates as a rhetorical controversy, in which commonly-used ideographs camouflage dramatically different constructions of the concepts at stake, helps to illuminate the way each side mobilizes public support for their narrative of doing . While both the exclusionary rule (which prohibits the use of illegally-obtained evidence in criminal cases) and the “fruit of …

International Extradition Of Mexican Narcotics Traffickers: Prospects And Pitfalls For The New Millennium, Rishi Hingoraney

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Germany V. United States In The International Court Of Justice: An International Battle Over The Interpretation Of Article Thirty-Six Of The Vienna Convention On Consular Relations And Provisional Measures Orders, Stephanie Baker

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Confusing Standards For Discretionary Review In Washington And A Proposed Framework For Clarity, Judge Stephen Dwyer

Seattle University Law Review

It has now been more than thirty-five years since the Washington Rules of Appellate Procedure (RAP) became effective in 1976 and replaced all prior rules governing appellate procedure. One significant change that those rules made was to clearly describe and delineate a procedural mechanism for seeking interlocutory review of trial court decisions. The ultimate effect on practitioners is both obvious and unavoidable. Many lawyers, rather than stake out a clear position regarding the applicability of the various considerations governing discretionary review, simply argue that any and every consideration that is even arguably applicable is satisfied by the trial court’s determination. …

Comparative Analysis Of Democracy And Sentencing In The United States As A Model For Reform In Iraq, Sarah E. Kelman

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Watson V. State, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 76, Lindsay Liddell

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) a Batson objection to peremptory strikes should be analyzed with reference to the amount of allegedly targeted-group members within the venire; and (2) that a jury instruction is not issued in error when there was a reasonable likelihood that the jury did not understand the instruction incorrectly, even if the rule does not comprehensively explain the underlying doctrine, so long as it accurately states the law.

Institutional Sexual Assault And The Rights/Trust Dilemma, Francine Banner

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

Blystone V. Horn: The Third Circuit Guards Against Inadvertent Waiver Of The Right To Present Mitigating Evidence During A Capital Case, Dylan J. Scher

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Miller'S Promise: Re-Evaluating Extreme Criminal Sentences For Children, Nick Straley

Washington Law Review

Scientific, legal, and societal notions about youth have come together to reaffirm an age-old concept—children are different and they change as they grow older. In recent decisions, the United States Supreme Court has required courts and legislatures to take a new look at extreme criminal sentences imposed upon children. Life without parole sentences and decades-long, determinate sentences are constitutionally suspect when applied to children because they fail to adequately account for the dynamism of youth. Miller v. Alabama and Graham v. Florida announced two important principles: (1) that an extreme sentence can only be imposed upon a child following an …

Rethinking The Timing Of Capital Clemency, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

This Article reviews every capital clemency over the last four decades. It demonstrates that in the majority of cases, the reason for commutation was known at the conclusion of direct appeals—years or even decades before the habeas process ended. Yet when governors or pardon boards actually commuted the death sentences, they typically waited until the eve of execution, with only days or hours to spare. Leaving clemency until the last minute sometimes leads to many years of unnecessary state and federal habeas corpus litigation, and this Article documents nearly 300 years of wasted habeas corpus review. Additionally, last-minute commutations harm …

An Ntsb For Capital Punishment, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

When a fatal traffic accident happens, we expect the local police and prosecutors to handle the investigation and criminal charges. When afatal airplane crash occurs, however, we turn instead to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). The reason is that air crashes are complicated and the NTSB has vast expertise. Without that expertise, investigations falter. We need look no further than the mess made by Malaysian authorities in the search for Flight 370 to see the importance of expertise in handling complicated investigations and processes. It is easy to point to a similar series of mistakes by local prosecutors and …