CrimProf Blog

Editor: Kevin Cole
Univ. of San Diego School of Law

Monday, December 19, 2016

Arizona Governor's Office Questions "Start by Believing" Approach to Sexual Assault Investigations

The Center for Prosecutor Integrity has this interesting press release, in part questioning whether the approach makes convictions vulnerable to reversal. The release follows the jump.

Continue reading

December 19, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Weissman on Domestic Violence

Weissman deborahDeborah M. Weissman (University of North Carolina School of Law) has posted The Community Politics of Domestic Violence (Brooklyn Law Review, Forthcoming) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Gender violence has long been identified as a crisis of epidemic proportions that defies facile solution. Despite decades of law reform, and notwithstanding increased social services and public health interventions, the rates of gender violence have not appreciably declined. The field of domestic violence advocacy is itself in a crisis, and it has been difficult to discern the best way forward. Despite its intellectual and practical engagement, the domestic violence movement seems unable to shift from the neoliberal paradigm that emphasize the features associated with the carceral state while appearing indifferent to the structural sources of domestic violence as a social problem. Reliance on the criminal justice system has tended to fracture the domestic violence movement even as it marginalized itself from disenfranchised populations.

Continue reading

December 19, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sunday, December 18, 2016

Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads in Criminal Law eJournal

Ssrn logoare here.  The usual disclaimers apply.

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 159 'Revenge Porn' Reform: A View from the Front Lines
Mary Anne Franks
University of Miami School of Law
Date posted to database: 19 Oct 2016 
2 146 Extreme Prison Sentences: Legal and Normative Consequences
Melissa Hamilton
University of Houston Law Center
Date posted to database: 7 Nov 2016 
3 133 Finding Ordinary Meaning in Law: The Judge, the Dictionary or the Corpus?
Lawrence M. Solan and Tammy A Gales
Brooklyn Law School and Hofstra University
Date posted to database: 13 Oct 2016
4 120 A Catharsis for U.S. Trust Law: American Reflections on the Panama Papers
Reid K. Weisbord
Rutgers Law School
Date posted to database: 20 Oct 2016
5 112 Bail Nullification
Jocelyn Simonson
Brooklyn Law School
Date posted to database: 5 Dec 2016 [new to top ten]
6 109 How Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys Differ in Their Use of Neuroscience Evidence
Deborah W. Denno
Fordham University School of Law
Date posted to database: 7 Nov 2016 [5th last week]
7 101 Punishment Theory for the Twenty-First Century: The Need to Replace Retributive and Mixed Theories
Michael Tonry
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities - School of Law
Date posted to database: 18 Oct 2016 
8 101 Criminal Law, Neuroscience and Voluntary Acts
Dennis Patterson
European University Institute
Date posted to database: 25 Oct 2016 [6th last week]
9 79 Faultless Guilt: Toward a Relationship-Based Account of Criminal Liability
Amy J. Sepinwall
Department of Legal Studies and Business Ethics, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Date posted to database: 31 Oct 2016 
10 78 From Policing to Parole: Reconfiguring American Criminal Justice
Michael Tonry
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities - School of Law
Date posted to database: 2 Nov 2016 [8th last week]

December 18, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Saturday, December 17, 2016

Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads in Criminal Procedure eJournal

Ssrn logoare here.  The usual disclaimers apply.

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 3,599 Do White Police Officers Unfairly Target Black Suspects?
John R. Lott and Carlisle E. Moody
Crime Prevention Research Center and College of William and Mary - Department of Economics
Date posted to database: 16 Nov 2016 
2 203 Debunking the Stranger in the Bushes Myth: The Case for Sexual Assault Protection Orders
Shawn Fields
University of San Diego School of Law
Date posted to database: 11 Oct 2016 
3 173 Forensics and Fallibility: Comparing the Views of Lawyers and Judges
Brandon L. Garrett and Gregory Mitchell
University of Virginia School of Law and University of Virginia School of Law
Date posted to database: 7 Nov 2016 
4 166 Rethinking Prosecutors’ Conflicts of Interest
Bruce A. Green and Rebecca Roiphe
Fordham University School of Law and New York Law School
Date posted to database: 9 Oct 2016 
5 112 Bail Nullification
Jocelyn Simonson
Brooklyn Law School
Date posted to database: 5 Dec 2016 [new to top ten]
6 110 The Law (?) of the Lincoln Assassination
Martin Lederman
Georgetown University Law Center
Date posted to database: 20 Oct 2016 [5th last week]
7 78 From Policing to Parole: Reconfiguring American Criminal Justice
Michael Tonry
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities - School of Law
Date posted to database: 2 Nov 2016 
8 76 The Wrong Decision at the Wrong Time: Utah v. Strieff in the Era of Aggressive Policing
Julian A. Cook
University of Georgia Law School
Date posted to database: 5 Nov 2016 
9 74 Good and Bad Ways to Address Police Violence
Lawrence Rosenthal
Chapman University, The Dale E. Fowler School of Law
Date posted to database: 4 Nov 2016 [new to top ten]
10 73 Constitutional Liberty and the Progression of Punishment
Robert J. Smith and Zoe Robinson
University of North Carolina School of Law and DePaul University College of Law
Date posted to database: 28 Oct 2016 [9th last week]

December 17, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, December 16, 2016

Langer & Sklansky on Prosecutors and Democracy

Maximo Langer and David Alan Sklansky (University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) - School of Law and Stanford University) have posted Prosecutors and Democracy — Themes and Counterthemes (Epilogue) (Prosecutors and Democracy: A Cross-National Study (Maximo Langer & David Alan Sklansky eds., Cambridge University Press, 2017, Forthcoming)) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Discussions of the relationship between prosecutors and democracy have been excessively dominated by a narrow understanding of democracy as a principal-agent relationship in which prosecutors, as representatives of the people, are responsive to their wishes. A richer understanding of the sources of legitimation of prosecutors and of the relationship between prosecution and democracy may help deepen our understanding of what it is distinctive about prosecutors in the United States and open possible avenues for discussion and reform in the United States and elsewhere. This paper — a revised version of which will serve as the epilogue of PROSECUTORS AND DEMOCRACY: A CROSS-NATIONAL STUDY (Máximo Langer & David Alan Sklansky eds., Cambridge University Press, forthcoming 2017) — explores four different ways in which prosecutors might be thought to be “democratic” — or, alternatively, four different kinds of “democracy” that criminal prosecution can help to constitute. Prosecutors can promote representative democracy, by serving as an agent of the people. Prosecutors can be key figures in what can be called legal democracy, by serving as neutral and independent ministers of justice, advancing the rule of law. Prosecutors can be democratic by advancing the values that embody a given conception of democracy, such as liberal democracy and its values of liberty, dignity, and equality. Finally, systems of criminal prosecution can be configured to promote various conceptions of participatory democracy, by securing roles for the victims of crime and for members of the community more generally.

December 16, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Evans et al. on Examining Child Witnesses

Angela D. Evans, Stacia N. Stolzenberg and Thomas D. Lyon (Brock University Psychology Department, Arizona State University (ASU) - School of Criminology & Criminal Justice and University of Southern California - Gould School of Law) have posted Pragmatic Failure and Referential Ambiguity When Attorneys Ask Child Witnesses 'Do You Know/Remember' Questions (Forthcoming, Psychology, Public Policy & Law) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

“Do you know” and “Do you remember” (DYK/R) questions explicitly ask whether one knows or remembers some information while implicitly asking for that information. This study examined how 104 4- to 9-year-old children testifying in child sexual abuse cases responded to DYK/R wh- and yes/no questions. When asked DYK/R questions containing an implicit wh- question requesting information, children often provided unelaborated “Yes” responses. Attorneys’ follow-up questions suggested that children usually misunderstood the pragmatics of the questions. When DYK/R questions contained an implicit yes/no question, unelaborated “Yes” or “No” responses could be responding to the explicit or the implicit questions resulting in referentially ambiguous responses. Children often provided referentially ambiguous responses and attorneys usually failed to disambiguate children’s answers. Although pragmatic failure following DYK/R wh- questions decreased with age, the likelihood of referential ambiguity following DYK/R yes/no questions did not. The results highlight the risks of serious miscommunications caused by pragmatic misunderstanding and referential ambiguity when children testify.

December 16, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, December 15, 2016

Green & Levine on Disciplining Prosecutors for Abusing Discretion

Bruce A. Green and Samuel J. Levine (Fordham University School of Law and Touro College - Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center) have posted Disciplinary Regulation of Prosecutors as a Remedy for Abuses of Prosecutorial Discretion: A Descriptive and Normative Analysis (14 Ohio St. J. Crim. L. 143 (2016)) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Although courts have traditionally relied primarily on prosecutors’ individual self-restraint and institutional self-regulation to curb prosecutors’ excesses and redress their wrongdoing, aspects of prosecutors’ conduct can be regulated externally as well. One potential source of external regulation is professional discipline. As lawyers, prosecutors are regulated by state courts, which oversee processes for disciplining lawyers who engage in misconduct. In responding to prosecutors’ wrongdoing, courts generally express a preference for professional discipline over civil liability, which is limited by principles of absolute and qualified immunity. Likewise, courts favor professional discipline over adjudicatory remedies such as reversal of criminal convictions or suppression of evidence, which are often unavailable because of the harmless error doctrine and other limitations.

Continue reading

December 15, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Szojka et al. on Challenging the Credibility of Child Victims

Zsofia Szojka, Samantha J. Andrews, Michael E. Lamb, Stacia N. Stolzenberg and Thomas D. Lyon (University of London, University of Cambridge, University of Cambridge, Arizona State University (ASU) - School of Criminology & Criminal Justice and University of Southern California - Gould School of Law) have posted Challenging the Credibility of Alleged Victims of Child Sexual Abuse in Scottish Courts (Forthcoming, Psychology, Public Policy & Law) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

This study examined the effects of credibility-challenging questions (n = 2,729) on 62 5- to 17-year-olds’ testimony in child sexual abuse cases in Scotland by categorizing the type, source, and content of the credibility-challenging questions defence lawyers asked and assessing how children responded. Credibility-challenging questions comprised 14.9% of all questions asked during cross-examination. Of defence lawyers’ credibility-challenging questions, 77.8% focused generally on children’s honesty, whereas the remainder referred to specific inconsistencies in the children’s testimony. Children resisted credibility challenges 54% of the time, significantly more often than they provided compliant responses (26.8%). The tendency to resist was significantly lower for questions focused on specific rather than general inconsistencies, and peripheral rather than central content. Overall, children resisted credibility challenges more often when the aim and content of the question could be understood easily. As this was a field study, the accuracy of children’s responses could not be assessed. The findings suggest that credibility-challenging questions that place unrealistic demands on children’s memory capacities (e.g., questions focused on peripheral content or highly specific details) occur frequently, and that juries should be made aware of the disproportionate effects of such questioning on the consistency of children’s testimony.

December 15, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Yesterday's criminal law/procedure cert grants

Issue summaries are from ScotusBlog, which also links to papers:

  • Turner v. United States and Overton v. United StatesWhether the petitioners’ convictions must be set aside under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U. S. 83 (1963).
  • Lee v. United StatesWhether it is always irrational for a noncitizen defendant with longtime legal resident status and extended familial and business ties to the United States to reject a plea offer notwithstanding strong evidence of guilt when the plea would result in mandatory and permanent deportation.

December 15, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, December 14, 2016

Cuningham on Apple and the American Revolution

Cunningham_ClarkClark D. Cunningham (Georgia State University College of Law) has posted Apple and the American Revolution: Remembering Why We Have the Fourth Amendment (Yale Law Journal Forum, vol. 126, 2016) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

This essay provides a concise history of events prior to the Revolutionary War that led to the adoption of the Fourth Amendment and relates that history to current controversies over the use of search warrants to obtain electronically stored information from cell phones and email accounts in the cloud, in particularly the FBI's attempt to get court orders forcing Apple to create and give to the government software eliminating the user privacy and security features of the iPhone and the pending Microsoft lawsuit against the Department of Justice challenging email search gag orders.

Compelling comparisons are drawn between the infamous Lord Halifax general warrants used in 1763 to seize all of a suspect's private papers and search them for evidence of seditious libel and warrants currently used by the federal government to seize the entire contents of a cell phone or of a cloud account and then conduct review of every item of digital data.

Continue reading

December 14, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Larkin on Prisoner-Dog Training Programs

Paul J. Larkin Jr. (The Heritage Foundation) has posted Death Row Dogs, Hard Time Prisoners, and Creative Rehabilitation Strategies: Prisoner-Dog Training Programs (Catholic University Law Review, Forthcoming) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

The use of Prisoner-Dog Programs (PDPs) is an innovative rehabilitative strategy that takes advantage of the bond that humans have had with dogs for thousands of years. Numerous state correctional facilities, along with the BOP, have adopted these programs to give prisoners, and sometimes dogs, a second chance. The informal results witnessed to date appear positive for everyone concerned. In-mates benefit because the animal-training instruction they receive, along with the experience they acquire training dogs in their care, provides them with a skill that they can use after their release. More importantly, the relationship that a prisoner builds with his dog teaches him the need to achieve a goal; the importance of discipline and patience, along with disutility of violence, in being successful; the value and sense of self-worth in empathizing and caring for another creature; and, perhaps for the first time, the emotional bond with another living creature that allows him to feel and express love. Dogs benefit because they escape their own death row and find their own “forever” homes. Prisons benefit because the close interaction between prisoners and dogs leads to a reduction in the number of infractions and amount of violence. Members of the community benefit by receiving a dog that can become a service dog or a treasured family member. And society benefits from a reduction in the recidivism rate of participating inmates. That is a “win-times-five.”

Continue reading

December 14, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, December 13, 2016

Simonson on Bail Nullification

Simonson jocelynJocelyn Simonson (Brooklyn Law School) has posted Bail Nullification (Michigan Law Review, Vol. 115, 2017, Forthcoming) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

The longstanding scholarly debate over the ability of community members to engage in nullification has been confined to the study of jury nullification — when jurors acquit someone despite knowledge of their legal guilt. This Article explores the possibility of community nullification beyond the jury by analyzing the growing and unstudied phenomenon of community bail funds, which post bail for strangers based on broader beliefs regarding the overuse of pretrial detention. When a community bail fund posts bail, it can serve the function of nullifying a judge’s determination that a certain amount of the defendant’s personal or family money was necessary to ensure public safety and prevent flight. This growing practice — what this Article calls “bail nullification” — is powerful because it exposes publicly what many within the system already know to be true: that although bail is ostensibly a regulatory pretrial procedure, for indigent defendants it often serves the function that a real trial might, producing guilty pleas and longer sentences when an individual cannot afford to pay their bail.

Continue reading

December 13, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Drumbl on The Kapo on Film and in Criminal Law

Drumbl markMark A. Drumbl (Washington and Lee University - School of Law) have posted The Kapo on Film: Tragic Perpetrators and Imperfect Victims on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

The Nazis compelled, enlisted, and ‘promoted’ detainees into the administration of the labor and death camps. These detainees were called Kapos. The Kapos constitute a particularly contested, and at times tabooified, element of Holocaust remembrance. Some Kapos deployed their situational authority to ease the conditions of other prisoners, while others acted cruelly and committed abuses. This project explores treatment of the Kapo on film. This paper considers two films: Kapò (1959 dir. Pontecorvo (Italy)) and Kapo (2000 dir. Setton (Israel)), and additionally one stage play, Kapo in Jerusalem (2013 dir. Lerner (Israel)) which derives from a film of the same title (2014 dir. Barbash (Israel)). While these works do not explicitly consider international criminal law, they vivify themes of agency, blame, survival, shame, sacrifice, and recrimination with which law grapples. These two films vary in genre: a pulpy feature fiction film (Kapò (1959)) and a controversially-received documentary reportage (Kapo 2000); the stageplay (Kapo in Jerusalem), itself derivative of a film of the same title, is a fictional (and gripping) drama drawn from the experiences of an actual Auschwitz Kapo. This paper interrogates how these creative works portray victim-perpetrator circularity; how they contribute to history, memory, and recollection; and didactically how they explain ‘what happened,’ ‘why,’ and ‘what to do now’. This paper additionally contrasts cinematographic accounts and criminal law’s accounts, in particular, those in Israel’s Kapo trials. In the 1950’s, the Knesset passed legislation – the Nazi and Nazi Collaboration Punishment Act – to criminally charge suspected Jewish Kapos who had emigrated to the state of Israel following the Holocaust. Authorities conducted approximately forty prosecutions. The trials were awkward, the language of judgment gnarly, the absolutes of conviction or acquittal crudely reductionist, and the judges ‘trembled’ at having to sentence. This paper contends that cinematographic depictions of victim-victimizers can sooth the criminal law’s anxieties by filling spaces ill-served by the criminal law.

December 13, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sohoni on Crackdowns

Sohoni milaMila Sohoni (University of San Diego School of Law) has posted Crackdowns (Virginia Law Review, Vol. 102, 2017, Forthcoming) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

The crackdown is the executive decision to intensify the severity of enforcement of existing laws or regulations as to a selected class of offenders or offenses. Each year, federal, state, and local prosecutors and agencies carry out thousands of crackdowns on everything from trespassing to insider trading to minimum-wage violations at nail salons. Despite crackdowns’ ubiquity, legal scholarship has devoted little attention to the crackdown and to the distinctive legal and policy challenges that crackdowns can pose.

This Article offers an examination and a critique of the crackdown as a tool of public law. The crackdown can be a benign and valuable law enforcement technique. But crackdowns can also stretch statutory authority to the breaking point, threaten to infringe on constitutional values, generate unjust or absurd results, and serve the venal interests of the law enforcer at the expense of the interests of the public. Surveying a spectrum of crackdowns from the criminal and administrative contexts, and from local, state, and federal law, this Article explores the many ways that crackdowns may quietly subvert democratic values.

Continue reading

December 13, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Gavoor & Orlosky on Chaidez and Retroactivity

Aram A. Gavoor and Justin M. Orlosky (The George Washington University Law School and George Washington University, Law School, Students) have posted Chaidez v. United States - You Can't Go Home Again (Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics and Public Policy, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2015) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

This article examines a 2013 Supreme Court decision, Chaidez v. United States, in which the Court declined to apply retroactively another recent decision, Padilla v. Kentucky. To many observers, Chaidez appears to be a discrete departure from previous Sixth Amendment right to counsel jurisprudence. On a personal level, noncitizens who pled guilty to a crime without being apprised of the plea’s removal risks are now unable to seek redress under Padilla and return to their homes in the United States. This article examines relevant Sixth Amendment and retroactivity jurisprudence and proposes an explanation for the Court’s apparent about-face.

December 13, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, December 12, 2016

Robinson & Robinson on Tragedy, Outrage & Reform

Paul H. Robinson and Sarah M. Robinson (University of Pennsylvania Law School and Independent) have posted TRAGEDY, OUTRAGE & REFORM Crimes That Changed Our World: 1911 – Triangle Factory Fire – Building Safety Codes (Forthcoming, Chapter 1 in, TRAGEDY, OUTRAGE & REFORM: Crimes that Changed Our World (Rowman & Littlefield, 2018)) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Can a crime make our world better? Crimes are the worst of humanity’s wrongs but, oddly, they sometimes do more than anything else to improve our lives. As it turns out, it is often the outrageousness itself that does the work. Ordinary crimes are accepted as the background noise of our everyday existence but some crimes make people stop and take notice – because they are so outrageous, or so curious, or so heart-wrenching. These “trigger crimes” are the cases that this book is about.

They offer some incredible stories about how people, good and bad, change the world around them by energizing, or disgusting, the rest of us. The images are striking: a burning river, a hundred poisoned children, falling flaming bodies, four dead little girls in their Sunday best, collapsing skyscrapers, and indifferent police watching a wife get beaten.

Continue reading

December 12, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Opinion holding scheme to defraud depositor constitutes bank fraud

Justice Breyer delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court in Shaw v. United States.

December 12, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Scurich & John on Jurors' Presumption of Innocence

Nicholas Scurich and Richard S. John (University of California, Irvine and University of Southern California) have posted Jurors’ Presumption of Innocence (Journal of Legal Studies, Forthcoming) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

The presumption of innocence explicitly forbids jurors from using official suspicion or indictment as evidence of guilt in a criminal trial. A behavioral experiment tested whether jurors follow this prescription. It revealed that, compared to when an individual had been merely named, jurors thought the individual was significantly more likely to be guilty after a detective referred the case to the district attorney, and when the individual was formally charged and thus a criminal defendant. A judicial instruction to presume innocence reduced jurors’ beliefs about the defendant’s guilt. Regression analyses indicated that jurors’ priors predicted their posteriors, and further that their priors were predictive of verdicts even after accounting for their posteriors. The findings suggest that jurors make different assumptions about the guilt of a criminal defendant prior to the introduction of evidence, and that these assumptions influence their overall evaluation of the case as well as their verdict.

December 12, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

"The Lethal Gaps in How the Supreme Court Handles the Death Penalty"

From The New York Times:

That will be too late for Mr. Smith, who came up one vote short on Thursday night, illuminating a lethal gap in the Supreme Court’s internal practices. It takes four votes to put a case on the court’s docket, but it takes five to stop an execution.

Over the years, in fits and starts, some justices have sought to address this anomaly by casting a “courtesy fifth” vote to stay an execution when four justices thought the case worthy of further consideration.

. . .

In the 11 years that Chief Justice Roberts has led the Supreme Court, its commitment to such courtesy votes has been inconsistent. Until Thursday, though, it seemed to be on the upswing.

 

December 12, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sunday, December 11, 2016

Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads in Criminal Law eJournal

Ssrn logoare here.  The usual disclaimers apply.

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 148 'Revenge Porn' Reform: A View from the Front Lines
Mary Anne Franks
University of Miami School of Law
Date posted to database: 19 Oct 2016 [2nd last week]
2 140 Extreme Prison Sentences: Legal and Normative Consequences
Melissa Hamilton
University of Houston Law Center
Date posted to database: 7 Nov 2016 [3rd last week]
3 132 Finding Ordinary Meaning in Law: The Judge, the Dictionary or the Corpus?
Lawrence M. Solan and Tammy A Gales
Brooklyn Law School and Hofstra University
Date posted to database: 13 Oct 2016 [4th last week]
4 119 A Catharsis for U.S. Trust Law: American Reflections on the Panama Papers
Reid K. Weisbord
Rutgers Law School
Date posted to database: 20 Oct 2016 [5th last week]
5 105 How Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys Differ in Their Use of Neuroscience Evidence
Deborah W. Denno
Fordham University School of Law
Date posted to database: 7 Nov 2016 [6th last week]
6 100 Criminal Law, Neuroscience and Voluntary Acts
Dennis Patterson
European University Institute
Date posted to database: 25 Oct 2016 [7th last week]
7 98 Punishment Theory for the Twenty-First Century: The Need to Replace Retributive and Mixed Theories
Michael Tonry
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities - School of Law
Date posted to database: 18 Oct 2016 [8th last week]
8 76 From Policing to Parole: Reconfiguring American Criminal Justice
Michael Tonry
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities - School of Law
Date posted to database: 2 Nov 2016 [9th last week]
9 67 Faultless Guilt: Toward a Relationship-Based Account of Criminal Liability
Amy J. Sepinwall
Department of Legal Studies and Business Ethics, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Date posted to database: 31 Oct 2016 [new to top ten]
10 66 State v. Brelo and the Problem of Actual Causation
Ben Gifford
Harvard University, Law School, Students
Date posted to database: 16 Oct 2016 [new to top ten]

December 11, 2016 | Permalink | Comments (0)