Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Reality Check: Detention In The War On Terror, Monica Eppinger

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Can’T Touch This? Making A Place For Touch Dna In Post-Conviction Dna Testing Statutes, Victoria Kawecki

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Pastor, The Burning House, And The Double Jeopardy Clause: The True Story Behind Evans V. Michigan, David A. Moran

Articles

The true story behind Evans v. Michigan is that a man who was probably innocent, and who would almost certainly have been acquitted by the jury, had his trial shortened after it became obvious to the judge that the police had picked up a man who had nothing to do with the fire. In other words, the facts set forth by the Michigan Supreme Court, and repeated by Alito, were grossly misleading. And because I, like Alito, believed the Michigan Supreme Court’s version of the facts, I made a silly mistake when I agreed to take the case. That silly …

Effective Trial Counsel After Martinez V. Ryan: Focusing On The Adequacy Of State Procedures, Eve Brensike Primus

Articles

Everyone knows that excessive caseloads, poor funding, and a lack of training plague indigent defense delivery systems throughout the states, such that the promise of Gideon v. Wainwright is largely unfulfilled. Commentators have disagreed about how best to breathe life into Gideon . Many disclaim any possibility that federal habeas corpus review of state criminal cases could catalyze reform give n the many procedural obstacle s that currently prevent state prisoners from getting into federal court. But the Supreme Court has recently taken a renewed interest in using federal habeas review to address the problem of ineffective attorneys in state …

Stepping Into The Gap: Violent Crime Victims, The Right To Closure, And A Discursive Shift Away From Zero Sum Resolutions, Blanche Bong Cook

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Sections 9, 10 And 11 Of The Canadian Charter, Steve Coughlan, Robert Currie

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Section 9 of the Charter guarantees freedom from arbitrary detention, section 10 provides certain rights on arrest, and section 11 guarantees various rights to those charged with an offence. In this chapter the authors consider the aspects of these rights which have been authoritatively determined, as well as pointing to the areas which remain unsettled and discussing the areas of lingering controversy.

Imagining Success For A Restorative Approach To Justice: Implications For Measurement And Evaluation, Jennifer Llewellyn, Bruce Archibald, Donald Clairmont, Diane Crocker

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Whether restorative justice is “successful,” or not, is a complex question. Attempts to answer this question by practitioners, professionals, and scholars have often been bounded by common notions of success in standard criminal justice terms. The authors of this paper suggest that if restorative justice is properly understood in terms of its focus on relationship, success should be measured on new and different dimensions. This paper seeks to bring a relational imagination to the scholarly effort of capturing the essence of restorative justice and figuring out how to assess its successes and failures. The authors offer a foundation and agenda …

Telus: Asking The Right Questions About General Warrants, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The general warrant provisions in the Criminal Code have often been interpreted by lower courts in a way which threatens to make that power quite open-ended, and to make those warrants available as a way of making an "end run" around the requirements of other provisions. This note argues that the Supreme Court of Canada is correct, in Telus,to adopt a "substantive equivalence" approach to general warrants, thereby limiting the circumstances in which they can be used. Lower courts have sometimes taken the view that a general warrant is only unavailable if the proposed technique would fall squarely within some …

"Dearest Property": Digital Evidence And The History Of Private "Papers" As Special Objects Of Search And Seizure, Donald A. Dripps

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

No abstract provided.

The International Criminal Court Ten Years Later: Appraisal And Prospects, Joseph M. Isanga

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The International Criminal Court (ICC) faces significant challenges in achieving its objectives of deterrence, retribution, and ending impunity, primarily due to slow procedures, lack of state cooperation, and perceptions of bias. While the ICC has made qualitative contributions to international criminal law, its effectiveness is undermined by procedural inefficiencies, political interference, and limited enforcement mechanisms. The court's reliance on the complementarity principle and state cooperation highlights the tension between its judicial and political roles, with its future success contingent on addressing these systemic issues.

Illuminating Corruption Pathways: Modifying The Fcpa's "Grease Payment" Exception To Galvanize Anti-Corruption Movements In Developing Nations, Ivan Perkins

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article argues that the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) should be modified to require companies to report "grease payments," small bribes intended to expedite routine government actions. This change aims to enhance transparency, align U.S. law with stricter international standards, and combat corruption more effectively. The proposal suggests that mandating disclosure of such payments to the Department of Justice (DOJ), which would then publish the information online, would help activists, journalists, and foreign governments identify and address corruption. While the article acknowledges potential challenges, such as companies circumventing reporting or facing reputational risks, it emphasizes the long-term benefits of …

American Criminal Procedure In A European Context, Mar Jimeno-Bulnes

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article examines the historical and contemporary distinctions between the accusatorial and inquisitorial criminal justice systems, tracing their evolution from common law and civil law traditions. It highlights the increasing convergence of these models, particularly the influence of the U.S. adversarial system on European procedures, while critiquing the practical challenges and inefficiencies of both systems. The analysis emphasizes the tension between procedural fairness and efficiency, urging reforms to address these issues.

Subverting Brady V. Maryland And Denying A Fair Trial: Studying The Schuelke Report, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The Schuelke Report about the ill-fated federal prosecution of the late-Senator Ted Stevens is an extraordinary contribution to criminal procedure. No other official documentation or investigative study of a criminal prosecution to my knowledge has dissected and analyzed as carefully and thoroughly the sordid and clandestine actions of a team of prosecutors who zealously wanted to win a criminal conviction at all costs. In examining this Report, one gets the feeling that as the investigation and prosecution of Senator Stevens unfolded, and the prosecution’s theory of guilt unraveled, the prosecutors became indifferent whether the defendant was really guilty; they just …

Dissent Into Confusion: The Supreme Court, Denialism, And The False “Scientific” Controversy Over Shaken Baby Syndrome, Joelle Moreno, Brian Homgren

Utah Law Review

In the United States Supreme Court's first opinion on the merits from its 2011-2012 term, three members of the Court contributed their authoritative voices to one of the most recent -- and one of the most deadly -- false scientific controversies, the purported scientific debate over the medical diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome (SBS), a prevalent form of abusive head trauma (AHT).

On October 31, 2011, in Cavazos v. Smith, the Supreme Court upheld Shirley Ree Smith's conviction for causing the death of her seven-week-old grandson, Etzel. This conviction was based on the jury finding that Etzel died from SBS. …

Why Strickland Is The Wrong Test For Violations Of The Right To Testify, Daniel J. Capra, Joseph Tartakovsky

Washington and Lee Law Review

A criminal accused has a constitutional right to testify in his own defense. The right has an undisputed place alongside the most important “personal” rights, like the right to remain silent or the right to represent oneself. But in the 1990s, courts began to apply the ineffective-assistance test of Strickland v. Washington to evaluate claims by a defendant that his right to testify was abridged. In practice this nullifies the right. Moreover, the Strickland test is inapposite because it focuses on counsel and not the defendant’s right to testify. This Article proposes a new test to better secure and enforce …

The New State Postconviction, Giovanna Shay

Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines two October Term 2011 Supreme Court cases – Maples v. Thomas and Martinez v. Ryan – which have a significant impact on the provision of counsel in state postconviction proceedings. In Maples and Martinez the Court expanded the circumstances in which deficient performance by state postconviction counsel can overcome procedural default, to permit the prisoner to litigate defaulted claims on the merits in federal habeas. The Author argues that, given the increased significance of state postconviction under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), Maples and Martinez could have a salutary effect on the development of …

Does Living By The Sword Mean Dying By The Sword, Charles Chernor Jalloh

Articles

This article examines the right to self-representation in international criminal law, and the common challenges posed for judges effectuating that right in international criminal courts. Using a comparative law approach, the paper demonstrates how the interpretation of that right initially borrowed heavily from U.S. common law and later European civil law to address the problems caused by self-representing, disruptive, and uncooperative defendants. Although the right to self-representation is a Sixth Amendment right in U.S. law, and an equally fundamental one in international law, the author contends that this right seems better in theory than in practice. Indeed, since no self-representing …

Proceedings Of The Seventh International Humanitarian Law Dialogs, Recent Developments In International Criminal Law: 2012–2013, Mark A. Drumbl

Scholarly Articles

This publication is based on Professor Drumbl’s keynote address on August 27, 2013 at the Seventh International Humanitarian Law Dialogs held in Chautauqua, New York.

Quarreling Over Quarles: Limiting The Extension Of The Public Safety Exception, Andrew T. Winkler

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

This article addresses the issue of whether the Quarles public safety exception applies after a suspect invokes his Fifth Amendment right to counsel. Due to the lack of guidance in the Quarles opinion, lower courts have expressed confusion as to whether the public safety exception applies to Edwards. Several courts have extended the exception, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth and Ninth Circuits, while some state appellate courts have declined to do so. Part II of this article provides the requisite background for understanding Miranda's Fifth Amendment right to counsel, the Edwards rule, and the Quarles public …

Anchors Away: Why The Anchoring Effect Suggests That Judges Should Be Able To Participate In Plea Discussions, Colin Miller

Faculty Publications

The “anchoring effect” is a cognitive bias by which people evaluate numbers by focusing on a reference point – an anchor – and adjusting up or down from that anchor. Unfortunately, people usually do not sufficiently adjust away from their anchors, so the initial choice of anchors has an inordinate effect on their final estimates. More than 90% of all criminal cases are resolved by plea bargains. In the vast majority of those cases, the prosecutor makes the initial plea offer, and prosecutors often make high initial offers. Assuming that the prosecutor’s opening offer operates as an anchor, nearly all …