JournalTOCs

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law
Number of Followers: 6

This is an Open Access Journal

Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 1934-9629
Published by U of California Berkeley School of Law

[11 journals]

The Unrealized Promise of Forensic Science – A Study of its
Production and Use
- Authors: Anderson; James M.
  PubDate: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 17:37:56 GMT
Masterpiece or Mess: The Mosaic Theory of the Fourth Amendment
Post-Carpenter
- Authors: Fairbanks; Robert
  PubDate: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 17:37:56 GMT
Hot-Car Deaths and Forgotten-Baby Syndrome: A Case Against Prosecution
- Authors: Breitfeld; Erika
  Abstract: This article calls on prosecutors and policymakers to re-examine their perception and treatment of parents who forget their children in cars. It offers prosecutors a guide on how to analyze these cases and urges them to advocate for reform in their communities. For support, the article explores the neuroscience behind forgetting a child. It also examines recent cases to identify three categories of parents in hot-car child deaths: parents who truly forget their children in the car, parents who take calculated risks because they are uneducated about the danger of leaving children in cars, and parents who commit criminally negligent and intentional filicide. Finally, the article argues that fundamental criminal- law principles do not support a finding of criminal responsibility against truly forgetful parents—and argues that prosecutors should use community engagement along with existing safety and educational tools to reduce the ranks of the first two parent groups and the number of hot- car child deaths.
  PubDate: Wed, 13 May 2020 19:44:38 GMT
A New “Critical Stage”' Federal Pretrial Services Interviews Meet the
Sixth Amendment
- Authors: Press; Cole
  Abstract: The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees criminal defendants the right to be represented by counsel during all “critical stages” of his or her proceedings. In the early 1980s, Congress established federal pretrial services throughout the country to interview defendants charged in federal court to ensure that they would receive a fair and reasonable bail based upon their previous criminal history and ties to the local community. While the intended purpose of these interviews is to provide as much pertinent information as possible to the magistrate determining bail, the content of these interviews have also been used to impeach defendants during trial and/or in determining a sentence for a defendant adjudicated guilty. While many federal district courts voluntarily allow defense counsel to be present during the pretrial services interview, it is not considered a “critical stage,” and thus a defendant is not guaranteed the right to counsel despite the heightened consequences of the interview.This article proposes that the current status quo regarding pretrial services in untenable and in conflict with the Sixth Amendment right to assistance of counsel. It suggests two potential solutions to the problem. The first is to recognize that pretrial services interviews do not comport with the text and statutory history of the federal pretrial services program. The second, and preferred, solution is to assert that all pretrial services interviews are a “critical stage,” and require that all federal district courts guarantee each defendant the right to counsel during those interviews.
  PubDate: Wed, 13 May 2020 19:44:38 GMT
President Obama’s Misunderstood Clemency Initiative
- Authors: Sunshine; James Russell
  Abstract: President Obama’s Clemency Initiative resulted in the commuta- tion of 1,696 federal sentences. Despite this achievement, some advocates of a more robust use of executive clemency criticize the initiative as overly bureaucratic, chaotic, and limited. This paper argues that these criticisms stem from a combination of misunderstandings of and disagreements with the Obama administration’s actual goals. Through exclusive and in-depth interviews conducted by the author with high ranking officials from the White House and Department of Justice, as well as publicly available in- formation at the time, this paper shows that administration officials did not envision the initiative as substitute for broader criminal justice reform legislation. Rather, the Obama administration viewed the initiative as a limited, time-specific remedy to help alleviate a particular unfairness: in- mates serving excessively long sentences based on the date they were sen- tenced. Placed in this context, this article argues that many of the aspects of the Clemency Initiative that have been criticized were features neces- sary for the initiative’s success, as defined by the administration. Finally, this article makes recommendations to future administrations that wish to exercise the clemency power as an effective tool for correcting current and future injustices in the criminal justice system.
  PubDate: Wed, 13 May 2020 19:44:38 GMT