Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Cold Comfort Food: A Systematic Examination Of The Rituals And Rights Of The Last Meal, Sarah Gerwig-Moore

Articles

Last meals are a resilient ritual accompanying executions in the United States. Yet states vary considerably in the ways they administer last meals. This paper explores the recent decision in Texas to abolish the tradition altogether. It seeks to understand, through consultation of historical and contemporary sources, what the ritual signifies. We then go on to analyze execution procedures in all 35 of the states that allowed executions in 2010, and show that last meal allowances are paradoxically at their most expansive in states traditionally associated with high rates of capital punishment (Texas now being the exception to that rule.) …

Understanding Violent Adolescent Males: Implications For Post Release Recidivism, Michael O. Johnston Ph.D.

2010-2016 Archived Posters

Simple assault is common among mid-adolescent males in Iowa and throughout the United States. The barriers and supports that exist for mid-adolescents when choosing nonviolence is well-documented in past research. Little is known about the choice of nonviolence for mid-adolescent males who have been labeled delinquent by juvenile courts.

Juror Internet Misconduct: A Survey Of New Hampshire Superior Court Judges, Brooke Lovett Shilo

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “The Constitution guarantees criminal defendants the right to a fair trial before an impartial jury and the right to confront the evidence against them. When a juror improperly accesses the Internet during a criminal trial, the defendant is denied these constitutional rights. The problem of outside information entering the courtroom is as old as our judicial system. As early as 1907, Justice Holmes observed that, “The theory of our [criminal justice] system is that the conclusions to be reached in a case will be induced only by evidence and argument in open court, and not by any outside influence, …

Recent Development: Barnes V. State: A Suspect's Detention Did Not Evolve Into De Facto Arrest When The Execution Of A Warrant Was Delayed For Three Hours; Police May Detain A Suspect After The Warrant Execution If They Reasonably Suspect Criminal Activity, Harrison Bliss

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a three-hour delay in the execution of a warrant was reasonable and did not constitute de facto arrest. Barnes v. State, 437 Md. 375, 394, 86 A.3d 1246, 1257 (2014). The court of appeals also held that a short investigatory detention, following the execution of the warrant, did not suggest de facto arrest, and therefore did not require probable cause. Id. at 397, 86 A.3d at 1259. Finally, the court held that the evidence collected from the search of an individual’s storage unit was lawfully obtained because the officers had the requisite …

The Trayvon Martin Trial - Two Comments And An Observation, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1371 (2014), Richard Delgado

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Stop Presumptive Transfers: How Forcing Juveniles To Prove They Should Remain In The Juvenile Justice System Is Inconsistent With Roper V. Simmons & Graham V. Florida, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 365 (2014), Rachel Fugett

UIC Law Review

Overly expansive juvenile transfer laws are inconsistent with the Court’s reasoning because their primary objective is to transfer juveniles into the adult criminal justice system solely for the purpose of punishing and sentencing them like adults. In so doing, expansive juvenile transfer laws, more often than not, largely ignore a juvenile’s diminished culpability and greater capacity for change.

The Jury Wants To Take The Podium -- But Even With The Authority To Do So, Can It? An Interdisciplinary Examination Of Jurors' Questioning Of Witnesses At Trial, Mitchell J. Frank

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Rise Of The Machines: Machine-Generated Data And The Confrontation Clause, Brian Sites

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Surprising Acquittals In The Gotovina And Perisic Cases: Is The Icty Appeals Chamber A Trial Chamber Is Sheep's Clothing, Mark A. Summers

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Testimonial Is As Testimonial Does, Ben L. Trachtenberg

Faculty Publications

In December 2012, the Florida Law Review published Ben Trachtenberg’s article “Confronting Coventurers: Coconspirator Hearsay, Sir Walter Raleigh, and the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause,” 64 Fla. L. Rev. 1669 (2012). Using the example of hearsay admitted in criminal prosecutions related to the Holy Land Foundation, the article argued that under Crawford v. Washington, courts had begun admitting unreliable hearsay against criminal defendants that previously would have been barred under Ohio v. Roberts, the Confrontation Clause case upended by Crawford.

Richard D. Friedman, the Alene and Allan F. Smith Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, responded in “The Mold …

The Marriage Of State Law And Individual Rights And A New Limit On The Federal Death Penalty, Jonathan Ross

Cleveland State Law Review

Since the 1990s, federal prosecutors have, with increasing frequency, sought the death penalty for federal offenses committed in and also punishable under the laws of non-death penalty states. Critics of this practice have pointed out that federal prosecutors can use the federal death penalty to circumvent a state's abolition of capital punishment. Courts, however, have almost unanimously rejected arguments that state law should be a shield from federal punishment for federal offenses. This article proposes a novel way to challenge the federal death penalty's use in a non-death penalty state—the Supreme Court's reasoning in United States v. Windsor. In Windsor, …

Threats And Bullying By Prosecutors, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Part I of this Essay describes ten contexts in which prosecutors make threats and behave like bullies. Some of these contexts are familiar, such as grand jury proceedings or plea discussions, where threats are generally upheld. Threats in other contexts are not as easy to justify, such as threats to obtain testimony from prosecution witnesses, retaliating for the exercise of constitutional rights, forcing a waiver of civil rights claims, and publicly humiliating people. Other threats clearly are illegitimate and unethical, such as threats that drive defense witnesses off the stand, bringing criminal charges against outspoken critics and defense experts, and …

Analysis Of The Efficacy Of Criminal Court Mediation As A Tool Of Restorative Justice, Teresa Hoerres

Capstone Collection

This capstone research paper aims to capture the personal narratives of how participants of criminal court mediation in Brooklyn, New York actual experience the program. The program, which is facilitated by New York Peace Institute, is a cornerstone of the organization’s restorative justice program. Restorative justice has been gaining traction over the last few decades, and its application to criminal matters as an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) service, is unprecedented.

The research was conducted using a mixed methodology approach, relying on the researcher’s ethnographic observations of the criminal court mediation program from August 2013 through March 2014, as well as …

Confrontation And The Re-Privatization Of Domestic Violence, Deborah Tuerkheimer

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

When the Supreme Court transformed the right of confrontation in Crawford v. Washington, the prosecution of domestic violence predictably suffered as a result. But commentators at the time did not anticipate how the Court’s subsequent Confrontation Clause cases would utterly misconceive the nature of domestic violence, producing a flawed understanding of what constitutes a “testimonial” statement. Although the Court’s definition was especially problematic in the domestic violence context, its overly rigid approach finally became intolerable in Michigan v. Bryant, a 2011 case that did not involve domestic violence. In Bryant, the Court resurrected a public–private divide that …

The Crawford Debacle, George Fisher

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

First a toast—to my colleague Jeff Fisher and his Crawford compatriot, Richard Friedman, on the tenth anniversary of their triumph: What they achieved in Crawford is every lawyer’s dream. By dint of sheer vision and lawyerly craft, they toppled what many saw as a flawed confrontation-law regime and put in its place one that promised greater justice. For that, much applause is due. Still there’s no denying their doctrine’s a muddle, if not as conceived, then as realized. Consider the count: Four justices almost agree on Crawford’s contours but patch over the issues that divide them. A fifth justice …

Crawford V. Washington: The Next Ten Years, Jeffrey L. Fisher

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

Imagine a world . . . in which the Supreme Court got it right the first time. That is, imagine that when the Supreme Court first incorporated the Confrontation Clause against the states, the Court did so by way of the testimonial approach. It’s not that hard to envision. In Douglas v. Alabama—issued in 1965, on the same day the Court ruled that the Confrontation Clause applies to the states—the Court held that a nontestifying witness’s custodial confession could not be introduced against the defendant because, while “not technically testimony,” the confession was “the equivalent in the jury’s mind …

Gender-Conscious Confrontation: The Accuser-Obligation Approach Revisited, Michael El-Zein

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

The Supreme Court’s recent Confrontation Clause decisions have had a dramatic effect on domestic violence prosecution throughout the United States, sparking debate about possible solutions to an increasingly difficult trial process for prosecutors and the survivors they represent. In this Note, I revisit and reinterpret the suggestion by Professor Sherman J. Clark in his article, An Accuser-Obligation Approach to the Confrontation Clause,1 that we should view the Confrontation Clause primarily as an obligation of the accuser rather than a right of the accused. Specifically, I reevaluate Clark’s proposition using a gendered lens, ultimately suggesting a novel solution to the problem …

Preempting The Police, David Jaros

All Faculty Scholarship

Fighting crime requires that we vest police with extensive discretion so that they can protect the public. Unfortunately, the nature of police work makes it difficult to ensure that law enforcement authority is not abused. This challenge is exacerbated by the fact that a great deal of questionable police activity exists in the legal shadows — unregulated practices that do not violate defined legal limits because they have generally eluded both judicial and legislative scrutiny. Local law enforcement strategies, like the maintenance of unauthorized police DNA databases and the routine practice of initiating casual street encounters, threaten fundamental notions of …

Nuremberg Lives On: How Justice Jackson's International Experience Continues To Shape Domestic Criminal Procedure, Brian R. Gallini

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

The end of Germany’s participation in World War II came with its formal surrender on May 8, 1945. After extensive debate over what would come of top Nazi leaders, twenty-two Nazi defendants were tried and ultimately convicted after 216 days of trials held in Nuremberg spread across eleven months between November 1945 and 1946. Associate Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson took a leave of absence from the Court to lead the trial’s prosecutorial effort. Decades of scholarship have considered and evaluated the Nuremberg trials alongside Jackson’s role in them. But, no article has evaluated how Justice Jackson’s experience as …

When Counsel Abandonment Forecloses Post-Conviction Relief: An Argument For Applying The Doctrine Of Cause And Prejudice To The Aedpa Statute Of Limitations, Katherine I. Puzone

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.