85.3

Print
Comment
85.3
Righting Categorical Wrongs: A Holistic Solution to Rule 8(a)’s Same-or-Similar-Character Prong
Matthew Deates
BA 2012, University of Minnesota; JD Candidate 2018, The University of Chicago Law School

I would like to thank Professor Alison Siegler for introducing me to the law on joinder. This Comment would not exist without her guidance and support. I would also like to thank the talented editors of the Law Review for their helpful comments and suggestions.

A criminal defendant is charged with wire fraud in violation of 18 USC § 1343. As he and his defense attorney prepare for trial, the US Attorney’s Office notifies him that there is reason to believe he has previously committed bankruptcy fraud in violation of 18 USC § 152.

Criminal Law
Print
Article
85.3
Rethinking Family-Court Prosecutors: Elected and Agency Prosecutors and Prosecutorial Discretion in Juvenile Delinquency and Child Protection Cases
Josh Gupta-Kagan
Assistant Professor of Law, University of South Carolina School of Law

The author would like to thank Albertina Antognini, Annette Appell, Elizabeth Chambliss, Martin Guggenheim, Avni Gupta-Kagan, Clare Huntington, Cortney Lollar, Adrian Smith, Robin Walker-Sterling, and participants in a faculty workshop at the University of Kentucky College of Law and Duke Law School’s 2015 conference on civil rights, “The Present and Future of Civil Rights Movements: Race and Reform in 21st Century America,” for thoughtful comments on earlier drafts. The author would like to thank Joni Gerrity for excellent research assistance.

The law and the academy have long recognized criminal prosecutors’ immense power, especially the power to determine which cases to prosecute and which not to. Less attention has been focused on related issues in juvenile delinquency and child protection cases litigated in state family courts.
Children and Families Criminal Law
Print
Article
85.3
Defining Flight Risk
Lauryn P. Gouldin
Associate Professor, Syracuse University College of Law; JD, New York University School of Law; AB, Princeton University

I thank the Criminal Justice Section of the Association of American Law Schools for honoring this work as the First Runner-Up in the 2017 Junior Scholars Paper Competition. For their thoughtful comments and feedback, I am grateful to Laura Appleman, Shima Baradaran Baughman, Todd Berger, Keith Bybee, Michael Cahill, Nicolas Commandeur, Jessica Eaglin, Nicole Smith Futrell, Cynthia Godsoe, Russell Gold, Nina Kohn, Corinna Lain, Kate Levine, Sandy Mayson, Janet Moore, Lauren Ouziel, Ellen Podgor, Anna Roberts, Laurent Sacharoff, Tim Schnacke, Jocelyn Simonson, Cora True-Frost, and Sam Wiseman. Thank you also to the participants in the NYC Markelloquium at Brooklyn Law School; the participants in the 2016 AALS Hot Topics program, “Responding to the Money Bail Crisis”; the participants in CrimFest 2016 at Cardozo Law School; and the participants in the Junior Scholars Criminal Justice Roundtable at Brooklyn Law School and St. John’s University School of Law. With much appreciation also to Hillary Anderson, S. Alex Berlucchi, Jordan Charnetsky, Irem Karacal, David Katz, Amy Rhinehardt, and Erin Shea for outstanding research assistance. I am also indebted to Kyle Jorstad, Pat Ward, Carly Gibbs, John McAdams, Eian Katz, and the other editors of The University of Chicago Law Review for their insightful suggestions.

The number of low-risk defendants who spend time in pretrial detention in this country is staggering: “Every year, more than 11 million people move through America’s 3,100 local jails, many on low-level, non-violent misdemeanors.”

Criminal Defense
Print
Article
85.3
Courts, Congress, and the Conduct of Foreign Relations
Kristen E. Eichensehr
Assistant Professor, UCLA School of Law

For their generous engagement with this project, I am grateful to Aslı Bâli, Will Baude, Curt Bradley, Sam Bray, Josh Chafetz, Zach Clopton, Stephen Gardbaum, Carole Goldberg, Robert Goldstein, Jon Michaels, Kal Raustiala, Richard Re, Ryan Scoville, Shirin Sinnar, Stephen Vladeck, the editors of The University of Chicago Law Review, and participants in the Junior Faculty Federal Courts Workshop, Southern California International Law Scholars Workshop, and UCLA School of Law Summer Works-in-Progress Workshop. Andrew Brown, Nicholas Garver, Danielle Hesse, and Joshua Ostrer provided excellent research assistance.

In the US constitutional system, the executive branch generally conducts foreign relations. But in recent years, the nonexecutive branches—the judiciary and Congress—have challenged the exclusivity of the president’s authority to conduct foreign relations by opening direct channels of communication with foreign governments’ executive branches.

Courts International Law

Volumes