Criminal Procedure Commons^™

One Roof Judicial System In Indonesia, Sufiarina Sufiarina, Efa Laela Fakhriah

Indonesia Law Review

Judicial power as an independent and autonomous power must be free from any intervention and power, thus ensuring that judges possess independence and impartiality in handling cases. One of the measures for enhancing the independence and autonomy of the judiciary is by placing it under the one roof judicial arrangement developed by the Supreme Court, both from the judicial as well as the non-judicial technical aspects. Up to the present time, endeavors for bringing the four court jurisdictions under the one roof judicial arrangement developed by the Supreme Court have not been completely materialized, due to the existing dualism in …

Summary Of Howard V. State, 128 Nev. Adv. Op. 67, Priscilla Baker

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered the State’s motion to reconsider and other various motions regarding the sealing of the ex parte motion to substitute counsel. It further deliberated whether documents and records could be filed under seal in a pending criminal case before the Court. In addition, the Court also addressed the requirements and procedures for sealing such documents and records.

Summary Of State V. Tricas, 128 Nev. Adv. Op. 62, Katelyn Franklin

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered the State’s appeal from a district court order granting the defendant’s motion to withdraw her guilty plea and to dismiss the criminal case under Nevada’s prosecutorial immunity statutes, NRS 178.572 and NRS 178.574.

Summary Of Jackson V. State, 128 Nev. Adv. Op. 55, Sarah Mead

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeals from district court judgments of conviction based on similar questions regarding double jeopardy and redundancy. The Court considered whether a criminal defendant who is charged with both attempted murder and battery or aggravated battery through a single act can be so charged, or whether such a charge constitutes double jeopardy, or violates Nevada’s common law redundancy theory.

Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. Umali, Andrew J. Vansingel

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appellate Division, First Department - People V. Martinez, Jean K. Delisle

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York - In Re Suarez, Malaika Makembe

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. White, Rosalinde Casalini

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appellate Division, First Department - People V. Boyd, Joseph M. D'Amico

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. Leon, Madeline Katz, Madeline Klotz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appellate Division, First Department - People V. Williams, Brian E. Peterson

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Huntington, New York's Sex Offender Policy And The Intrastate Right To Travel, James Tierney

Touro Law Review

Sex offenders are among the most loathed and detested members of our society. Over the past fifteen years, communities have zealously passed laws restricting the rights of sex offenders. These laws mandate that sex offenders register with authorities and severely limit where sex offenders may reside. This legislation is designed to foster an important goal: to protect the health and safety of children from possible recidivism from sex offenders. In 2007, the Town Board of Huntington, New York, passed a law barring sex offenders from renting or leasing accessory apartments within the Town. The health and safety of the town's …

When "Reasonableness" Is Not So Reasonable: The Need To Restore Clarity To The Appellate Review Of Federal Sentencing Decisions After Rita, Gall, And Kimbrough, Craig D. Rust

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Rise, Decline, And Fall (?) Of Miranda, Yale Kamisar

Washington Law Review

No abstract provided.

Death Penalty, Josh D. Moore

Mercer Law Review

Between June 1, 2011 and May 31, 2012, the Georgia Supreme Court addressed several significant points of law in the context of death penalty litigation. The court grappled with two challenging speedy trial issues, one constitutional and the other statutory, in Phan v. State and Walker v. State, respectively. The court announced a new rule on the calculation of time limitations for impeachable convictions in Clay v. State. The court revisited the subject of burden of proof in mental retardation cases in Stripling v. State. And the court articulated a clear standard for evaluating prejudice in a …

Harmonizing Equitable Exceptions: Why Courts Should Recognize An “Actual Innocence” Exception To The Aedpa’S Statute Of Limitations, Morgan Suder

San Diego Law Review

This Comment argues that to neutralize this potential inequality, the Supreme Court should affirm the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Lee v. Lampert, finding that a credible claim of actual innocence constitutes an equitable exception to the AEDPA’s one-year statute of limitations period. District courts must be able to call on their equitable powers, including both equitable principles already applied to the AEDPA’s statute of limitations as well as the actual innocence exception, in determining whether a district court may consider the merits of a criminal defendant’s otherwise untimely habeas petition.

Part II discusses the role of federal habeas corpus …

An Open Courts Checklist: Clarifying Washington's Public Trial And Public Access Jurisprudence, Jeanine Blackett Lutzenhiser

Washington Law Review

Fundamental to the American system of justice is the right to a public trial and a general presumption of openness in judicial proceedings. These values are reflected in the First and Sixth Amendments of the United States Constitution and in many state constitutions. Washington is one of a number of states whose constitution (unlike the U.S. Constitution) also explicitly guarantees the open administration of justice. Constitutional dilemmas arise when a party requests the closure of a courtroom or the sealing of documents. These requests force courts to harmonize values of open justice with other compelling interests. U.S. Supreme Court decisions …

The Incredible Shrinking Confrontation Clause, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

Sharp turns in the Supreme Court’s recent Confrontation Clause jurisprudence have left scholars reeling from conflicting emotions: exhilaration, despair, denial, and soon, perhaps, cynical acceptance. While most commentators celebrated the demise of the incoherent Ohio v. Roberts framework, their excitement largely faded as the Court’s decisions in Davis v. Washington and Bryant v. Michigan revealed nascent flaws in the evolving doctrine and sharply curtailed the newly revitalized confrontation right.

Recent scholarship strives to reanimate the jurisprudence by expanding the doctrinal definition of “testimonial” statements – the sole form of evidence that the Court now recognizes as implicating the Confrontation Clause. …

Plea Bargaining And The Right To The Effective Assistance Of Counsel: Where The Rubber Hits The Road In Capital Cases, John H. Blume

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Perfecting Criminal Markets, David Jaros

All Faculty Scholarship

From illicit drugs to human smuggling to prostitution, legislators may actually be perfecting the very criminal markets they seek to destroy. Criminal laws often create new dangers and new criminal opportunities. Criminalizing drugs creates the opportunity to sell fake drugs. Raising the penalties for illegal immigration increases the risk that smugglers will rely on dangerous methods that can injure or kill their human cargo. Banning prostitution increases the underground spread of sexually transmitted disease. Lawmakers traditionally respond to these “second order” problems in predictable fashion — with a new wave of criminalization that imposes additional penalties on fake drug dealers, …