Criminal Law. Venue. Double Jeopardy Clause. Sixth Amendment. Experts analyze the Supreme Court’s holdings in important criminal law cases. In Smith v. United States the Court rules that double jeopardy does not apply to trials conducted in the wrong venue. Samia v. United States addresses whether use of a non-testifying co-defendant’s confession at trial violates the right to confront witnesses. Finally, they discuss what the dismissal after oral argument of In Re Grand Jury might mean to efforts to expand the scope of the attorney-client privilege.
Margaret S. Williams, Barbara Meierhoefer, Carly E. Giffin, Jana E. Laks, Leeann W. Bass, Laural L. Hooper, Kenneth Lee
September 18, 2023
This report evaluates the implementation of the interim recommendations made by the Ad Hoc Committee to Review the Criminal Justice Act, appointed by the Chief Justice, in its
Equal Protection. Title VI. Affirmative Action. Experts discuss the Courts move from allowing the consideration of race to remedy past harms and promote diversity, to the emerging constitutional requirement to create a color-blind society.
Grave Risk Defense | Child’s Objection to Return | Role of Trial Court
In this case, after being left in the father’s care for two years, a child was removed from Brazil by his maternal aunt and taken to Massachusetts to live with his mother.
This package of materials was transmitted to the Judicial Conference, and it includes proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure to become effective on December 1, 2023.
David E. Rauma, James B. Eaglin, Carly E. Giffin, Marvin L. Astrada
December 16, 2021
This report presents the findings from focus groups conducted with judiciary and nonjudiciary stakeholders on the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts' Wiretap Report.
Federal Criminal Statutes. Experts discuss the Court’s refusal to read statutes broadly and the importance of judges considering the impacts of race and addiction in sentencing.
Constitutional Criminal Law. Experts discuss the Supreme Court’s elimination of the Watershed Exception for procedural rule changes in Edwards v. Vannoy, and the lack of need for specific findings in life without parole sentencing of juveniles in Jones v. Mississippi.