Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Finding The Original Meaning Of American Criminal Procedure Rights: Lessons From Reasonable Doubt’S Development, Randolph N. Jonakait

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “The prosecution must prove every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt for a valid conviction. The Constitution nowhere explicitly contains this requirement, but the Supreme Court in In re Winship1 stated that due process commands it. Justice Brennan, writing for the Court, noted that the Court had often assumed that the standard existed, that it played a central role in American criminal justice by lessening the chances of mistaken convictions, and that it was essential for instilling community respect in criminal enforcement. The reasonable doubt standard is fundamental because it makes guilty verdicts more difficult. As Winship …

The Problem Of Policing, Rachel A. Harmon

Michigan Law Review

The legal problem of policing is how to regulate police authority to permit officers to enforce law while also protecting individual liberty and minimizing the social costs the police impose. Courts and commentators have largely treated the problem of policing as limited to preventing violations of constitutional rights and its solution as the judicial definition and enforcement of those rights. But constitutional law and courts alone are necessarily inadequate to regulate the police. Constitutional law does not protect important interests below the constitutional threshold or effectively address the distributional impacts of law enforcement activities. Nor can the judiciary adequately assess …

Policing, Popular Culture And Political Economy: Towards A Social Democratic Criminology [Book Review], Mark Findlay

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

No abstract provided.

The Defense Attorney As Mediator In Plea Bargains, Gabriel Hallevy

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

In this article, it will be argued that defense counsel's function in negotiating plea bargains is identical to that of a mediator, seeking to reconcile the positions of the defendant and the prosecution. Within this framework, the plea bargain should be seen as part of the broad conception of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) which first made its appearance at the end of the 1970s. An analysis of plea bargains in the Western world as part of the broader concept of ADR actually shows that it is the defense attorney, rather than the court or the other parties to the issue, …

Impeachable Offenses?: Why Civil Parties In Quasi-Criminal Cases Should Be Treated Like Criminal Defendants Under The Felony Impeachment Rule, Colin Miller

Pepperdine Law Review

With one exception, every Federal Rule of Evidence dealing with propensity character evidence or evidence which can be misused as propensity character evidence makes it either: (a) as difficult to admit such evidence in civil trials as it is in criminal trials, or (b) more difficult to admit such evidence in civil trials than it is in criminal trials. The "mercy rule" falls into this latter category as it allows criminal defendants to inject the issue of character into their trials while a similar luxury is not afforded to civil parties. Before 2006, however, a substantial minority of courts extended …

Kimbrough And Gall: Taking Another "Crack" At Expanding Judicial Discretion Under The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Chris Gaspard

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Given An Inch, The Detainee Effort To Take A Mile: The Detainee Legislation And The Dangers Of The "Litigation Weapon In Unrestrained Enemy Hands", Brian D. Fahy

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

International Travel With A "Digital Briefcase": If Customs Officials Can Search A Laptop, Will The Right Against Self-Incrimination Contravene This Authority?, Ashley H. Verdon

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Sexual Assault Counselor-Victim Privilege: Jurisdictional Delay Into An Unclaimed Sanctuary, Armand Arabian

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

(Re)Forming The Jury: Detection And Disinfection Of Implicit Juror Bias, Anna Roberts

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Waiving Innocence, Samuel R. Wiseman

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Legitimizing International Criminal Justice: The Importance Of Process Control, Nancy Amoury Combs

Michigan Journal of International Law

The last two decades have witnessed an astounding transformation of the international legal landscape as the international community has created a series of courts and tribunals to prosecute those accused of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. As a consequence of this international institution building, prosecutions are currently underway for crimes committed across the globe: in the former Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Sierra Leone, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Cambodia, among other places. These international criminal tribunals and particularly the first modern tribunal- the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY)-have undergone two significant evolutions. One of these …

Criminal Sanctions In The Defense Of The Innocent, Ehud Guttel, Doron Teichman

Michigan Law Review

Under the formal rules of criminal procedure, fact finders are required to apply a uniform standard of proof in all criminal cases. Experimental studies as well as real world examples indicate, however, that fact finders often adjust the evidentiary threshold for conviction in accordance with the severity of the applicable sanction. All things being equal, the higher the sanction, the higher the standard of proof that fact finders will apply in order to convict. Building on this insight, this Article introduces a new paradigm for criminal punishments-a paradigm that focuses on designing penalties that will reduce the risk of unsubstantiated …

Predators And Propensity: The Proper Approach For Determining The Admissibility Of Prior Bad Acts Evidence In Child Sexual Abuse Prosecutions, Basyle Tchividjian

Faculty Publications and Presentations

PREDATORS AND PROPENSITY: THE PROPER APPROACH FOR DETERMINING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF PRIOR BAD ACTS EVIDENCE IN CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE PROSECUTIONS

Basyle J. Tchividjian†

Abstract

The admissibility of prior bad act evidence in child sexual abuse prosecutions oftentimes makes the difference between a guilty and not guilty verdict. Recently, jurisdictions have growingly embraced the admission of such evidence for the purpose of establishing the defendant’s propensity to sexually victimize children. Due to the potentially high prejudicial effect of admitting propensity evidence, it is more critical than ever that courts carefully apply the decisive evidentiary gatekeeper, the probative value balancing test …

Miranda’S Hidden Right, Laurent Sacharoff

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

When the Court in Miranda v. Arizona applied the Fifth Amendment “right to remain silent” to the stationhouse, it also created an inherent contradiction that has bedeviled Miranda cases since. That is, the Court in Miranda said that a suspect can waive her right to remain silent but also that she must invoke it. Numerous courts have repeated this incantation, including most recently last summer in Berghuis v. Thompkins. But how can both be true about the same right? Either the suspect has the right and can waive it or does not yet enjoy it and must therefore invoke it. …

Can The Ceo Learn From The Condemned? The Application Of Capital Mitigation Strategies To White Collar Cases, Todd Haugh

All Faculty Scholarship

Ted Kaczynski and Bernie Madoff share much in common. Both are well-educated, extremely intelligent, charismatic figures. Both rose to the height of their chosen professions—mathematics and finance. And both will die in federal prison, Kaczynski for committing a twenty-year mail-bombing spree that killed three people and seriously injured dozens more, and Madoff for committing the largest Ponzi scheme in history, bilking thousands of people out of almost $65 billion. But that last similarity—Kaczynski’s and Madoff’s plight at sentencing—may not have had to be. While Kaczynski’s attorneys tirelessly investigated and argued every aspect of their client’s personal history, mental state, motivations, …

Juror Privacy In The Sixth Amendment Balance, Melanie D. Wilson

Scholarly Articles

Some eight million citizens report for jury duty every year. Arguably, jury duty is one of the most significant opportunities to participate in the democratic process. For the accused, the jury acts as an indispensable safeguard against government overreaching. One might expect, therefore, that our justice system would treat potential jurors with care and tact. The opposite is true. During voir dire, prospective jurors are required to share insights into their own lives, quirks, proclivities, and beliefs. Litigants have probed jurors’ sexual orientation, criminal histories, criminal victimization, health, family relations, and beyond. A few scholars have chided the system for …

Evidence-Based Litigation Reform, Emily Spottswood

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

G Forces: Gideon V. Wainwright And Matthew Adler's Move Beyond Cost-Benefit Analysis, Janet Moore

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

With the approach of the fiftieth anniversary of Gideon v. Wainwright, Matthew Adler's continuous prioritarian social welfare economic theory provides an interesting new resource for advocates of public defense reform. Adler argues for a moral decision-making procedure in large-scale policy settings that prioritizes the interests of the less well-off. This essay identifies some key steps in Adler's analysis, highlights several avenues for critique and further development of his arguments, and begins to explore the doctrinal development of the right to counsel as an instantiation of his inequality-averse approach to moral decision-making.

Berghuis V. Thompkins: Retreat From Miranda, Jacquline Grossi

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.