The concepts embodied in criminal procedure influence the way a case is handled from the moment criminal behavior is suspected by police until a defendant has fulfilled the requirements of his or her sentence. While the U.S. Constitution identifies some inalienable rights of a criminal, such as the right to remain silent and the right to counsel, states may freely grant rights that are unique. It is expected that courts and legislatures continue to clarify and debate issues of expanded discovery as more cases and statutes become available.
Links to related online resources are listed below. Non-digitized publications may
be borrowed from the NCSC Library; call numbers are provided.
The modern Supreme Court no longer sees the Exclusionary Rule as anchored by the Fourth Amendment itself. The Court now envisions the rule in strictly instrumental terms and not in remedial terms the way the Framers thought about remedies for rights violations.
This preliminary study attempted to assess how appraisals of the strength of eyewitness evidence affect plea bargaining decisions by prosecutors and defense attorneys.
In 2009, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Arizona v. Gant, in which it significantly limited the search incident to arrest exception in the automobile search context. This article discusses why the Court’s decision in Gant lacks real-world, practical effect, and how the Court can close the loophole in its Gant holding.
The Supreme Court‟s decision in Herring v. United States resurrected the debate over the future of the exclusionary rule in American criminal procedure. This Article will look at the changing perception of the rule as illustrated by Justices Roberts and Ginsburg‟s contrasting views.
In this paper the authors attempt an overview of what an “innocentric” system would look like, and what changes would be required to reform our current practices to come as close to such a system as possible.
Criminal section from Examining the Work of State Courts: An Analysis of 2009 State Court Caseloads.
Criminal section from State Court Guide to Statistical Reporting.
This report was prepared under a February 2009 agreement between the National Center for State Courts and the Bernalillo County for a study of felony case processing in the Second Judicial District Court of New Mexico.
Presentation from the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of the National Court Technology Conference. Overview of the history and process of NICS.
Government Relations describes the impact, position, and summary on the issue of Limitations on Federal Review of State Criminal Convictions in Congress.
The purpose of this research is to evaluate the impact of the PLRA and the AEDPA. The goal was to determine the extent to which AEDPA and the PLRA have affected the number of habeas corpus petitions and prisoner lawsuits filed, respectively.
Lower courts recently have divided on whether the good faith exception to the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule applies to reliance on overturned case law. This Article argues that the Supreme Court should reject the good faith exception in this setting.
American Constitution Society for Law and Policy
Argues that this controversial rule is essential in balancing individual privacy and police power. The idea behind the rule is that the government should not benefit from its own wrongdoing. Studies show that criminals accused of violent crime almost never go free because of excluded evidence.
The United States Attorney`s Office, Western District of Virginia, provides an explanation of approval process of an indictment and the nature of an indictment.
Florida Bar Journal
Defines mitigation evidence and describes the "difference between explaining a person's wrongful behavior and explaining it away." He then assesses both of these viewpoints.
UNC School of Government, Administrative Justice Bulletin
Gives a general explanation of indictments and describes example cases for specific types of criminal activities.
In contrast with the common assumption in the plea bargaining literature, the authors show that fairness related concerns systematically impact defendants’ preferences and judgments.
The New York Times
Prosecutors are being more coercive in order to make defendants consider not going to court at all, causing the percentage of felony cases that go to trial to drop in many places. The overloaded court system has incentivized keeping people out of court, eliminating the need for a trial by offering plea bargains. This article explains that it is not necessarily innocent vs. guilty anymore, it is however you wish to weigh your options.
This study describes the legal issues that surround pretrial diversion by surveying appellate cases from across the country.
Bureau of Justice Assistance
This brief overview defines these voluntary diversion programs. It explains how they can reduce crime by eliminating underlying factors such as mental illness or substance abuse which could eventually reduce recidivism. However, the author asserts that there neds to be more research conducted in order to assess whether or not these programs are actually effective.
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics
This report includes statistics regarding pretrial releases, which is most common for defendants charged with property offenses. Some notable figures include: half of those with no prior record were released pre-trial, and of defendants released, nearly 80% were given restrictions including substance abuse requirements, weapons restrictions, and travel restrictions.
Pre-Trial Justice Institute
Explains the framework of a pre-trial services program and the factors that impact pre-trial release decisions. It describes how to implement a program in a jurisdiction that does not already have one and explains the legal reasoning behind why such programs exist.
Join NCSC today to improve the administration of justice.