Posts tagged as:

crime and punishment

  • Some reps push to cut off federal funds for states with Stand Your Ground laws [Maguire, Just One Minute] Podcast and video of Cato’s panel discussion on SYG laws [and related from Tim Lynch] Muddle-prone media mischaracterizes other cases besides Martin/Zimmerman as SYG [Sullum] “Shame of mandatory minimums shows in Marissa Alexander case” [Roland Martin, CNN, via Alkon] More: Florida voter poll shows strong support for SYG [Sun-Sentinel] New medical reports could prove helpful to defense in Martin/Zimmerman case [WFTV, more]
  • Feds prosecute building firm for paying NYC labor graft, but as for those who receive it… [Holman Jenkins, WSJ, with Wal-Mart Mexico FCPA angle]
  • Why is the Center for American Progress helping the Obama administration pretend that it’s ended the Drug War? [Mike Riggs] “Jailed for trying to fill a prescription” [Amy Alkon] “She stole his heroin, so she was the victim” [Jacob Sullum]
  • Conduct on which defendant was acquitted can still count as prior bad act evidence [Scott Greenfield]
  • New UK justice law abolishes indefinite sentences for public protection (IPPs) [Barder]
  • “Debtor’s Prison for Failure to Pay for Your Own Trial” [Tabarrok]
  • ACLU on unsettling possibilities of surveillance drones, law enforcement and otherwise [Lucy Steigerwald]

{ 4 comments }

Radley Balko on the John McNeil case from Georgia. By reversing some of the assumed racial valences, will it give partisans on both sides reason to think harder about both the value of self-defense rights and the importance of a neutral rule of law? Well, one can hope.

Hair-raising

by Walter Olson on April 17, 2012

“Justice Department officials have known for years that flawed forensic work might have led to the convictions of potentially innocent people nationwide, but prosecutors failed to notify defendants or their attorneys even in many cases they knew were troubled.” Among the cases: that of Santae Tribble, who spent 28 years in prison following a murder-robbery conviction based on claimed hair identification now known to be erroneous. [Washington Post, more]

Follow-up from the Post on the Justice Department’s lack of transparency; and see my colleague Tim Lynch’s post at Cato.

Many will breathe a sigh of relief following Judge Alex Kozinski’s new opinion for an en banc Ninth Circuit in United States v. Nosal, establishing that (contrary to some fears) the “anti-hacking” provisions of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act do not penalize broad swaths of computer usage that exceed “authorized” use. A ruling the other way might have criminalized many instances of employee goofing-off as well as common user violations of website terms-of-service. [Orin Kerr, Volokh Conspiracy, Ken at Popehat] Earlier here, here, here, etc.

{ 2 comments }

“How many times a day do you break the law?” That could be the title of a new Harvey Silverglate book, but it’s a concern that was already vexing Americans more than a century ago. [Kyle Graham]

{ 4 comments }

A media organization has asked me to take a closer look at the controversy over Florida’s Stand Your Ground (SYG) law, and I’ll be working on that over the next day or two. In the mean time, here are a few links you might want to check out if you’re following the controversy (earlier):

  • Florida’s law on justifiable use of force, including the 2005 SYG changes, is here. As usual, there is no substitute for reading the statute if you want to know how it works. Links to other state SYG laws are here.
  • Michael Mannheimer at PrawfsBlawg points out that some of the law’s reputed new burdens on prosecutors aren’t in fact new:

    First, some have pointed out that, in Florida, the prosecution has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act in self-defense, assuming the defendant has adduced sufficient evidence to present a jury question. But this is true in virtually every State: last I checked, only Ohio and South Carolina require a defendant to shoulder the burden of persuasion on self-defense. Some have pointed out that when a defendant claims self-defense in a homicide prosecution, the State has lost its best witness and the jury therefore hears only one side of the story. But this is true in any homicide case. …

    So what are we left with that distinguishes Florida’s law? Well, obviously there is the “stand your ground” provision which eliminates the common-law duty to retreat. But the law in America has always been ambivalent about the duty to retreat, with about half the States at any given time recognizing the duty to retreat and about half abrogating it. This is not a new development. Moreover, even where there is no duty to retreat, it is still a requirement that the defendant reasonably believed that deadly force was necessary to prevent the imminent use of deadly physical force. And even in a retreat jurisdiction, the prosecution generally must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew he could retreat with complete safety. So, in practice, there is not a whole lot of daylight between retreat and no-retreat jurisdictions. …

  • But Mannheimer also points to a more significant difference in the 2005 law, namely that the self-defense justification is couched as an immunity rather than as a defense to be raised at trial. This distinction does accord a significant advantage to some defendants, especially where prosecutors hold a factually weak hand at the outset. “Meg” from Cambridge, among the few constructive voices amid the NYT comments section’s baying mob, makes a similar point here.
  • And a number of commentators raise plausible objections to details of the SYG legislation which do not appear relevant to whether George Zimmerman can escape prosecution for shooting Trayvon Martin. Thus Adam Winkler questions whether immunity should extend to situations where the user of deadly force acted in reasonable fear of lethal danger or forcible felony aimed at some third person other than himself (it would appear Zimmerman asserted danger-to-himself, not danger-to-third-parties, at the police station). And Anthony Sebok, writing at the time of the law’s passage, sharply criticizes the law’s expansion of immunity in home and car scenarios, again not at issue in the Martin case.

All of which is by way of clearing the decks for a closer examination of the provisions of SYG that do relate to Zimmerman’s claim of immunity, which will have to wait for a later post.

{ 12 comments }

“Shaken-baby” horror

by Walter Olson on March 23, 2012

More evidence that innocent parents are in prison over infant deaths [Emily Bazelon, Slate; earlier here, etc.]

{ 4 comments }

The New York Times invited me to participate in a “Room for Debate” discussion of Florida’s controversial “Stand Your Ground” self-defense law, and my contribution is here. I elaborate on some of the issues at stake — including the failure of Florida’s violent crime rate to rise as predicted under the law — in this Cato post (& welcome Instapundit, Reihan Salam/NRO, Alex Adrianson/Insider Online, Aaron Worthing, David Codrea readers).

{ 29 comments }

March 12 roundup

by Walter Olson on March 12, 2012

{ 2 comments }

The high cost of vindication

by Walter Olson on February 27, 2012

Acquitted, but now homeless, in Des Moines [Des Moines Register].

{ 2 comments }

The U.S. Attorney’s office in Los Angeles appears to be proceeding on the theory that city and redevelopment officers committed potential “fraud” by accepting federal money for housing projects but omitting to run the projects in compliance with laws like the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requiring that accommodations be offered for disabled patrons. At Cato at Liberty, I wonder whether we’re in for another venture into criminalization of an area best left to civil law.

Deposed press lord Conrad Black is taking a public stand against the law enforcement and corporate-governance authorities that put him behind bars. [Andrew McCarthy/The New Criterion, earlier]

The 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act bans feeding protected dolphins, seals and whales. A grand jury has now indicted licensed marine biologist Nancy Black, who sought to record the behavior of killer whales by rigging attachments to some killed prey that the predators were in the process of eating. Black’s attorney says she also faces a charge of lying to federal investigators because when asked to turn over evidence she gave them footage of the incident that she had already edited for reasons unrelated to the investigation. [The Economist]

{ 10 comments }

January 21 roundup

by Walter Olson on January 21, 2012

  • Because judges should decide cases the way clamoring crowds want them to: “Occupy the Courts” [Althouse, Somin, earlier] Pittsburgh lawprof: bank’s office park has become public forum and is ours to seize [Daily Caller]
  • Some reactions to Megaupload indictment [Julian Sanchez, Ken at Popehat]
  • Kozinski, others trade quips at oral argument in Disneyland Segway ADA case [Courthouse News via Disabilities Law, earlier] “Ouch! Judge Posner eviscerates both a damages expert and the trial judge who let him testify against FedEx” [Technology Law Notes]
  • Victim of NYC gun laws: “Free Meredith Graves” [NRO] “NYC Business Bled To Death Over Toy Guns” [Moonbattery]
  • “Old Enough to Fight, Old Enough to Swipe: A Critique of the Infancy Rule in the Federal Credit Card Act” [Andrew Schwartz (Colorado), SSRN, via Ted Frank]
  • Federal drug cops unapologetic about role in Adderall shortage [Rob Port] A failure of central planning [Reuters, Jacob Sullum and more ("Does the DEA know what 'quota' means?")] Some trial lawyers pushing to ban the drug [via Ted Frank].
  • Go, my child, and steal no more: TSA agents who pilfered $40K from luggage get six months [AP via Balko]

{ 6 comments }

Curious goings-on during the sentencing process of a Vero Beach, Fla. lawyer gone wrong. [Vero Beach News]

{ 2 comments }

December 19 roundup

by Walter Olson on December 19, 2011

  • Too much of a stretch: US nixes copyright in yoga exercises [Bloomberg, earlier]
  • “Know your rights dealing with cops” material construed as probative of criminality [Popehat] Is Justice Scalia really an “unlikely” champion of defendants’ Constitutional rights? [LATimes, Adler] “Overcriminalization: The Legislative Side of the Problem” [Larkin/Heritage, related Meese] When feds spring false-statements trap, it won’t matter whether you committed underlying offense being investigated [Popehat] “‘Clean Up Government Act’ sparks overcriminalization concerns” [PoL]
  • Former Attorney General Mukasey on ObamaCare recusal flap [Adler]
  • American Antitrust Institute proposals might be discounted given group’s longstanding pro-plaintiff bias [Thom Lambert]
  • NYC: “The tour guide said that the way to get rich is to be a zoning lawyer.” [Arnold Kling]
  • “Obama’s Top Ten Constitutional Violations” [Ilya Shapiro, Daily Caller] In at least two major areas, “Obama has broken with precedent to curtail religious freedom” [Steve Chapman]
  • Ted Frank-Shirley Svorny med mal debate wraps up [PoL, Bader]

Prosecution roundup

by Walter Olson on November 25, 2011

  • Six-year-old charged with sexual assault [Channel3000.com, Wisconsin; Radley Balko]
  • “Beware: Cities Hunting You Down For Reagan-Era Parking Tickets” [David Kiley, AOL]
  • Waco, Texas: “McLennan DA fights DNA testing because exonerations override juries” [Grits for Breakfast] Robert Mosteller, “Failures of the Prosecutor’s Duty to ‘Do Justice’ in Extraordinary and Ordinary Miscarriages of Justice” [Legal Ethics Forum]
  • Controlled substances: “Could a US lawyer lawfully counsel clients about this proposed new law?” [John Steele, LEF]
  • Mens rea erosion a “deeply troublesome trend” [Kevin LaCroix on WSJ] “Trial penalty,” long sentence minimums give prosecutors muscle to extract plea deals [NYT, Sullum] “Settlements feed U.S. prosecutor overreach” [Reynolds Holding, Reuters BreakingViews] “Responsible corporate officer doctrine” worries pharma defense lawyers [WSJ Law Blog] “The continuing quest to criminalize business judgment” [Kirkendall]
  • “More than three-quarters of turn-of-the-century Chicago homicides led to no criminal punishment — not because the perpetrator could not be identified, but because no jury would convict.” [William Stuntz's posthumous book via Cowen]
  • “Scalia criticizes narcotics laws” [for over-federalization] [WSJ]

{ 2 comments }

Florida lawmakers have purported to impose strict liability on defendants for some drug crimes, but the mens rea (guilty mind) prerequisite is no mere option as a matter of constitutional principle. [Ilya Shapiro, Cato at Liberty] (& welcome Above the Law readers)

{ 2 comments }