Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law最新文献_第6页

Irreconcilable Differences: The Ninth Circuit's Conflicting Case Law Regarding Mutually Exclusive Defenses of Criminal Codefendants 不可调和的差异:第九巡回法院关于刑事共犯互斥辩护的冲突判例法

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law Pub Date : 2004-12-01 DOI: 10.15779/Z38P90B

Scott Hamilton Dewey

{"title":"Irreconcilable Differences: The Ninth Circuit's Conflicting Case Law Regarding Mutually Exclusive Defenses of Criminal Codefendants","authors":"Scott Hamilton Dewey","doi":"10.15779/Z38P90B","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38P90B","url":null,"abstract":"This article notes the existence of two mutually contradictory and irreconcilable lines of authority within the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding mutually exclusive defenses in criminal cases: one, reflected in U.S. v. Tootick, that specifically holds that there is no mandatory severance rule for mutually exclusive defenses in the Ninth Circuit; and the other, reflected in cases such as U.S. v. Sherlock, U.S. v. Throckmorton, and U.S. v. Mayfield, holding that there is such a mandatory severance rule. The article traces the evolution of the two lines of authority to discover how and why they evolved, including the origin of the mutually exclusive defenses doctrine in the federal Fifth and Seventh Circuits and its importation to the Ninth. The article concludes by calling for clarification of the issue and suggesting that following Tootick would be more efficient and more in keeping with the United States Supreme Court's 1993 holding in Zafiro v. United States.[NOTE: This article tried to make sense of mutually exclusive defenses within the narrow context of Ninth Circuit case law. It came before a later (2006) article that explored the origins and development of the doctrines of mutually exclusive defenses, mutually antagonistic defenses, irreconcilable defenses, and antagonistic defenses in all the federal circuit courts of appeals and found that the doctrines had tainted origins in every circuit, such that it is impossible to make sense of it in any circuit.]","PeriodicalId":386851,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2004-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132843365","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

California's Proposition 36 and the War on Drugs 加州36号提案和毒品战争

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.15779/Z38XS6J

C. Watson

引用次数: 0

Why the State Stops to Kill: The Death Penalty and the Rule of Law in Taiwan 国家为何停止杀戮:台湾的死刑与法治

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.15779/Z38B27PR6T

K. Su

引用次数: 2

Like Oil and Water 像油和水

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.15779/Z38732D

M. Goldbach

引用次数: 0

Is There Such a Thing as 'Virtual Crime'? 有“虚拟犯罪”这种东西吗?

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.15779/Z38MC94

S. Brenner

引用次数: 52

Through Police Eyes—the Ferguson Effect Scare 警察眼中的弗格森效应恐慌

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.15779/Z38F18SF4V

Ron Hosko

引用次数: 2

Realistic Opportunity for Release Equals Rehabilitation: How the States Must Provide Meaningful Opportunity for Release 现实的释放机会等于改造:各州必须如何提供有意义的释放机会

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.15779/Z38R634

S. Green

引用次数: 1

Is Public Opinion a Justifiable Reason Not to Abolish the Death Penalty? A Comparative Analysis of Surveys of Eight Countries 民意是不废除死刑的正当理由吗?八个国家调查的比较分析

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.15779/Z382J6849F

R. Hood

引用次数: 4

The Essential but Inherently Limited Role of the Courts in Prison Reform 法院在监狱改革中必不可少但又先天有限的作用

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.15779/Z38WS5S

Erwin Chemerinsky

{"title":"The Essential but Inherently Limited Role of the Courts in Prison Reform","authors":"Erwin Chemerinsky","doi":"10.15779/Z38WS5S","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38WS5S","url":null,"abstract":"To state the obvious, there is a crisis in California's prisons. There are far too many prisoners in much too little space with too few services. There seems no doubt that the budget crisis in California will continue to make this situation worse. Rather than more funding for desperately underfinanced prisons, there will be less. No effective solution is remotely in sight. My thesis is that judicial action is essential and unquestionably will improve the situation in prisons. Courts, however, are inherently limited in how much they can accomplish in effective prison reform. The central problem facing the California prisons too little money to pay for the needs of too many inmates is one that courts are ill-equipped to solve. To be sure, they can and must order improvements, but courts are poorly suited to solving problems that require tremendous increases in spending and significant improvements in administration. My analysis is developed in three points. First, there is a crisis in prisons in California and nationally. Second, the central cause of the crisis is a political process that is unlikely ever to provide an adequate solution. Third, courts can make a difference, but their role and effectiveness is inherently limited. The conclusion is bleak, but not without hope. It is possible that the serious budget crisis confronting California could encourage political solutions. For example, to reduce the overwhelming prison costs, California's legislature could choose to reduce dramatically the prison population, releasing those who are serving long sentences for non-violent offenses and changing the law to lessen the numbers being incarcerated for such crimes in the future. Currently, however, there is no indication that such a reform is even being considered.","PeriodicalId":386851,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129249060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

Using International Law to Defend the Accused 运用国际法为被告辩护

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.15779/Z38BW40

D. Amann, C. Fairweather, V. Rhoe

引用次数: 1