Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Correcting Criminal Justice Through Collective Experience Rigorously Examined, James S. Liebman, David Mattern

Faculty Scholarship

Federal and state law confers broad discretion on courts to administer the criminal laws, impose powerful penalties, and leave serious criminal behavior unpunished. Each time an appellate court reviews a criminal verdict, it performs an important systemic function of regulating the exercise of that power. Trial courts do the same when, for example, they admit or exclude evidence generated by government investigators. For decades, judicial decisions of this sort have been guided by case law made during the Supreme Court's Criminal Procedure Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s. It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that the rule-bound, essentially bureaucratic regulatory …

Interstate Conflict And Cooperation In Criminal Cases: An American Perspective, Jenia I. Turner

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Over the last decade, the European Union has adopted legislation that calls for the mutual recognition of arrest warrants, investigation orders, and penal judgments. These laws have aimed to strengthen the Union’s response to transnational crime, and EU policymakers are currently considering legislation to further harmonize the Union's law enforcement efforts. This Article compares these developments within the EU to the U.S. legal framework on mutual recognition in criminal matters. It examines the individual, state and systemic interests that U.S. state courts have considered in deciding whether to recognize other states' judgments, warrants, or investigative actions. These competing interests have …

Juries And The Criminal Constitution, Meghan J. Ryan

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Judges are regularly deciding criminal constitutional issues based on changing societal values. For example, they are determining whether police officer conduct has violated society’s "reasonable expectations of privacy" under the Fourth Amendment and whether a criminal punishment fails to comport with the "evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society" under the Eighth Amendment. Yet judges are not trained to assess societal values, nor do they, in assessing them, ordinarily consult data to determine what those values are. Instead, judges turn inward, to their own intuitions, morals, and values, to determine these matters. But judges’ internal …

Missing Mcveigh, Michael E. Tigar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Prosecutorial Discretion In Three Systems: Balancing Conflicting Goals And Providing Mechanisms For Control, Sara Sun Beale

Faculty Scholarship

In regulating the authority and discretion exercised by contemporary prosecutors,national systems balance a variety of goals, many of which are in tension or direct conflict. Forexample, making prosecutors politically or democratically accountable may conflict with theprinciple of prosecutorial neutrality, and the goal of efficiency may conflict with accuracy. National systems generally seek to foster equal treatment of defendants and respect for theirrights while also controlling or reducing crime and protecting the rights of victims. Systems thatrecognize prosecutorial discretion also seek to establish and implement policy decisions aboutthe best ways to address various social problems, priorities, and the allocation of resources. …

Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: The Constitutionality Of Georgia's Burden Of Proof In Executing The Mentally Retarded, Veronica M. O'Grady

Georgia Law Review

In 2002, the Supreme Court in Atkins v. Virginia announced that executing mentally retarded defendants violates the Constitution. Georgia's standard for determining whether a criminal defendant is mentally retarded-and therefore ineligible for the death penalty- is the highest in the nation, requiring defendants to prove mental retardation to a jury, during the guilt and innocence phase, beyond a reasonable doubt. As in the case of Warren Lee Hill, Jr., this high burden necessarily results in Georgia executing defendants who are almost certainly mentally retarded,arguably violating the Atkins directive. Though once the first state to create a ban on executing the …

Nuance, Technology, And The Fourth Amendment: A Response To Predictive Policing And Reasonable Suspicion, Fabio Arcila Jr.

Scholarly Works

In an engaging critique, Professor Arcila finds that Professor Ferguson is correct in that predictive policing will likely be incorporated into Fourth Amendment law and that it will alter reasonable suspicion determinations. But Professor Arcila also argues that the potential incorporation of predictive policing reflects a larger deficiency in our Fourth Amendment jurisprudence and that it should not be adopted because it fails to adequately consider and respect a broader range of protected interests.

Civil Rights In Crisis: The Racial Impact Of The Denial Of The Sixth Amendment Right To Counsel, Richard Klein

Scholarly Works

Whereas in 2013 there had been widespread celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision in Gideon v. Wainwright, much has been written in subsequent years about the unhappy state of the quality of counsel provided to indigents. But it is not just defense counsel who fail to comply with all that we hope and expect would be done by those who are part of our criminal courts; prosecutorial misconduct, if not actually increasing, is becoming more visible. The judiciary chooses to focus on the rapid processing of cases, often ignoring the rights of those being prosecuted …

Text Me: A Text-Based Interpretation Of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(E), Jennifer L. Case

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Growth Of Incarceration In The United States: Exploring Causes And Consequences, Jeremy Travis, Bruce Western, F. Stevens Redburn

Publications and Research

After decades of stability from the 1920s to the early 1970s, the rate of incarceration in the United States more than quadrupled in the past four decades. The Committee on the Causes and Consequences of High Rates of Incarceration in the United States was established under the auspices of the National Research Council, supported by the National Institute of Justice and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, to review evidence on the causes and consequences of these high incarceration rates and the implications of this evidence for public policy.

Our work encompassed research on, and analyses of, the …

Prosecutors’ Disclosure Obligations In The U.S., Bruce A. Green, Peter A. Joy

Faculty Scholarship

The article offers information on the prosecutor's discovery disclosure obligation in the U.S. Topics discussed include efforts of defense attorney in the prosecutor's disclosure obligation, efforts beyond the professional discipline, and legal enforcement to promote and support the approach of prosecutor's disclosure obligation, and collection of material used as evidence in the civil or criminal litigation.

Casual Ostracism: Jury Exclusion On The Basis Of Criminal Convictions, Anna Roberts

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Good Name: Applying Regulatory Takings Analysis To Reputation Damage Caused By Criminal History, Jamila Jefferson-Jones

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Wrong Kind Of Innocence: Why United States V. Begay Warrants The Extension Of "Actual Innocence" To Exclude Erroneous, Non-Capital Sentences, Greg Siepel

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Illusory Eighth Amendment, John F. Stinneford

UF Law Faculty Publications

Although there is no obvious doctrinal connection between the Supreme Court’s Miranda jurisprudence and its Eighth Amendment excessive punishments jurisprudence, the two are deeply connected at the level of methodology. In both areas, the Supreme Court has been criticized for creating “prophylactic” rules that invalidate government actions because they create a mere risk of constitutional violation. In reality, however, both sets of rules deny constitutional protection to a far greater number of individuals with plausible claims of unconstitutional treatment than they protect.

This dysfunctional combination of over- and underprotection arises from the Supreme Court’s use of implementation rules as a …

Flawed Forensics And The Death Penalty: Junk Science And Potentially Wrongful Executions, Jessica Dwyer-Moss

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

High Federalism: Marijuana Legalization And The Limits Of Federal Power To Regulate States, David S. Schwartz

Cardozo Law Review

The conflict between state marijuana legalization and the blanket federal marijuana prohibition of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) has created a federalism crisis in which the duties of state officials to adhere to state or federal law are unclear. Current federalism doctrine cannot even tell us whether or not a local police officer who encounters a person in state-authorized possession of marijuana must arrest the person and seize the marijuana. The two most clearly applicable federalism doctrines - the Tenth Amendment anti-commmandeering doctrine and federal preemption of state law under the Supremacy Clause - offer only unsatisfactory answers. Anti-commandeering doctrine …

Death Penalty, Josh D. Moore

Mercer Law Review

The Georgia Supreme Court addressed numerous cases touching on the death penalty in our survey period, including the review of four death sentences on direct appeal in Ellington v. State, Rice v. State, Barrett v. State, and Brockman v. State. Three of the death sentences reviewed on direct appeal were affirmed and one was reversed. The court also reversed the decision of a habeas court to vacate a death sentence in Humphrey v. Riley. Several other cases involving the death penalty at various stages of trial were also decided and will be addressed further as …

Contextual Expectations Of Privacy, Andrew D. Selbst

Cardozo Law Review

Fourth Amendment search jurisprudence is nominally based on a "reasonable expectation of privacy," but actual doctrine is disconnected from society's conception of privacy. Courts rely on various binary distinctions: Is a piece of information secret or not? Was the observed conduct inside or outside? While often convenient, none of these binary distinctions can adequately capture the complicated range of ideas encompassed by "privacy." Privacy theorists have begun to understand that a consideration of social context is essential to a full understanding of privacy. Helen Nissenbaum's theory of contextual integrity, which characterizes a right to privacy as the preservation of expected …

Seizing A Cell Phone Incident To Arrest: Data Extraction Devices, Faraday Bags, Or Aluminum Foil As A Solution To The Warrantless Cell Phone Search Problem, Adam M. Gershowitz

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.