U.S. Courts, Amendments & Criminal Procedure: Key Cases

Judicial review (purpose)

Courts check the other branches by striking down laws or government actions that violate the Constitution. Established in Marbury v. Madison (1803).

Judicial review scenario: NJ bans students from criticizing elected officials online

A court could strike it down as unconstitutional (First Amendment).

Federalism

Overlapping systems of authority: a national government plus state governments, each with its own laws and courts. Why we have two court systems.

Common law

Law built through court decisions (precedent) rather than only codes. Used in the U.S. and former British colonies; modern U.S. law keeps common-law traditions but relies heavily on statutes.

Precedent

A prior court decision that guides how later, similar cases are decided.

Stare decisis

"Stand by things decided": courts follow precedent. Promotes consistency, predictability, and stability.

First Amendment

Protects freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition.

Fourth Amendment

Protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. Warrants need probable cause and are issued by a neutral magistrate. Evidence gained illegally can be excluded (exclusionary rule).

Probable cause

The standard for a legal arrest, search, and seizure: a reasonable basis to believe a crime has been or is about to be committed.

Fifth Amendment

Protects against self-incrimination (confessions, Miranda) and double jeopardy; guarantees due process and grand jury indictment for serious federal crimes.

Sixth Amendment

Rights of the accused: speedy and public trial, impartial jury, notice of charges, confront witnesses, compulsory process, and assistance of counsel.

Fourteenth Amendment

Guarantees due process and equal protection against state governments; used to apply Bill of Rights protections to the states.

Which amendment? Police search a home without a warrant or probable cause

Fourth

Which amendment? Police coerce a confession without warning the suspect of his rights

Fifth

Which amendment? Indigent felony defendant is denied a lawyer

Sixth (applied to the states through the Fourteenth)

Which amendment? A state denies a person due process or equal protection

Fourteenth

Federal court hierarchy

District Courts > Courts of Appeals > U.S. Supreme Court

NJ court hierarchy

Municipal Court > Superior Court > Appellate Division > NJ Supreme Court

Which NJ court generally tries major criminal cases?

Superior Court

Trial court vs. appellate court

Trial courts hear evidence and witnesses. Appellate courts generally review the trial for legal errors.

Appeal vs. new trial

An appeal is NOT a new trial with new witnesses. It reviews legal errors, such as improperly admitted evidence.

Can every defendant insist on U.S. Supreme Court review?

No. Supreme Court review is generally discretionary.

State or federal court? Assault outside a restaurant; murder prosecution in Massachusetts

State court

State or federal court? Federal income-tax evasion; robbery of a federally insured bank

Federal court

Stages of a criminal case (order)

Arrest > initial appearance > preliminary hearing or grand jury > indictment > arraignment > plea negotiation or trial > sentencing > appeal

Initial appearance

Within 48 hours of arrest: formal notice of charges and rights; release, detention, or bail decided. Bail cannot be excessive (Eighth Amendment).

Grand jury

A jury that decides whether probable cause exists to proceed. Required for all FEDERAL cases. Decision is a true bill (indict) or no bill (do not indict).

Indictment

The formal charge issued by a grand jury (a true bill).

Arraignment

Judge reads the charges and the defendant pleads guilty or not guilty. Plea negotiation can occur at or after arraignment.

Trial order of events

Opening statements (prosecutor first, burden of proof) > prosecution's case > defense's case > rebuttal > closing arguments > jury instructions > deliberation > post-trial motions

Post-trial motion

Asks for an acquittal or a new trial.

Appeal (stage)

Follows sentencing (after a plea or trial). Reviews legal errors; not a new trial.

How a federal judge is selected

President nominates > Senate Judiciary Committee hearings > full Senate votes (simple majority confirms) > serves "during good behavior" (for life). Articles II and III.

Five ways states select judges

Partisan election (Texas), nonpartisan election (Nevada), governor appoints with senate confirmation (New Jersey), legislature (South Carolina, Virginia), merit plan (Missouri).

Which selection method gives voters the most direct influence?

Elections (partisan or nonpartisan).

Merit selection (Missouri Plan)

A commission screens applicants, the governor picks from a shortlist, then voters decide in an election. Mixes citizen and informed decisions; commissions can be dominated by insiders.

Judicial independence

Freedom to decide cases based on law and facts, not political pressure.

Judicial accountability

Mechanisms for the public and institutions to check judicial power.

Independence vs. accountability trade-off

Appointed-for-life judges are more independent; elected judges are more accountable to voters but face political pressure and campaign money.

Judge A (federal, life tenure) vs. Judge B (elected, faces voters next year)

Judge A is freer to follow the law (independence). Judge B is more answerable to the public (accountability).

Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. (2009)

A CEO spent about $3 million to help elect a West Virginia justice who then voted in his favor. Due process required the justice to recuse himself.

Republican Party of Minnesota v. White (2002)

Struck down a rule barring judicial candidates from announcing views on disputed legal issues: it restricted core political speech and voters need to know candidates' views.

How federal judges are removed

House impeaches; Senate convicts by a two-thirds vote. Rare (about 8 in 235 years).

How state judges can be removed

Varies: impeachment by the legislature, losing reelection, recall (some states), judicial conduct commissions (discipline, suspend, or recommend removal).

Why is federal life tenure important?

It protects judicial independence, which is why federal removal is so hard.

Judge John Russo Jr. (NJ, 2020)

Made inappropriate remarks to a sexual-assault survivor at a restraining-order hearing, plus other violations. Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct recommended suspension; NJ Supreme Court removed him and barred him from presiding. NJ judges are appointed, so the NJ Supreme Court is the check.

Powell v. Alabama (1932)

In a capital case, a poor and illiterate defendant has the right to counsel as part of due process.

Betts v. Brady (1942)

States did not have to appoint counsel for every indigent defendant, only in special circumstances. Overruled by Gideon.

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

All indigent people charged with felonies in state courts must be provided counsel (Sixth Amendment applied to the states).

Argersinger v. Hamlin (1973)

Extended the right to appointed counsel to indigent defendants charged with misdemeanors who face possible incarceration.

Appointment of counsel for indigent defendants

If a defendant cannot afford a lawyer and the right to counsel applies, the government must provide one (public defender or appointed attorney).

Strickland v. Washington (1984)

Test for ineffective assistance of counsel: (1) counsel's performance was deficient AND (2) the deficiency prejudiced the defense (reasonable probability the outcome would have differed).

Effective assistance of counsel / inadequate representation test

The right to counsel means competent counsel. To win, the defendant must show BOTH deficient performance and prejudice (Strickland).

Right-to-counsel case order

Powell (1932) > Betts (1942) > Gideon (1963) > Argersinger (1973) > Strickland (1984)

Scenario: indigent defendant charged with a state felony has no lawyer

Gideon v. Wainwright: the state must provide counsel.

Scenario: defense lawyer fails to investigate or sleeps through trial

Possible ineffective assistance claim. Apply Strickland: deficient performance + prejudice.

Crime equation

Actus reus + mens rea (and they must occur together: concurrence). The government must prove both.

Actus reus

The guilty act (or legally relevant omission). Ask: what did the person do?

Mens rea

The guilty mind: the mental state required by law. Ask: what was the person thinking or intending?

Mens rea spectrum (most to least culpable)

Purposely > knowingly > recklessly > negligently

Accident vs. crime scenario: careful driver backs out slowly and kills a pedestrian she did not see

Actus reus yes, mens rea maybe not. A bad outcome does not automatically equal a crime.

Criminal defenses (overview)

Arguments that negate or reduce criminal liability. Two major categories: justifications and excuses.

Justification

The act was permissible or right under the circumstances. Examples: self-defense, defense of others, necessity.

Excuse

The act was wrongful but the defendant is not blameworthy. Examples: insanity, duress, infancy, involuntary intoxication.

Justification vs. excuse (quick test)

Justification: "What I did was okay." Excuse: "What I did was wrong, but I shouldn't be blamed."

Self-defense

Justification: reasonable force to protect oneself from imminent unlawful harm.

Necessity

Justification: breaking the law to avoid a greater harm.

Duress

Excuse: the defendant acted because of an unlawful threat of serious harm.

Insanity

Excuse: because of mental disease or defect, the defendant lacked legal responsibility for the act at the time of the offense. (Competency is different: ability to understand the proceedings and help counsel at trial.)

Infancy

Excuse: a very young defendant is considered incapable of forming criminal intent.

Defense scenario: person attacked at knifepoint injures the attacker to escape

Self-defense (a justification).

Defense scenario: defendant, due to severe mental illness, did not understand what he was doing was wrong

Insanity (an excuse).

Corrections eras (order)

Colonial (1600s-1790s) > Pennsylvania (1790s-1860s) > Reformatory/Progressive (1870s-1920s) > Medical (1930s-1960s) > Community (1960s-1970s) > Crime control (1970s-2000s)

Colonial era

1600s-1790s. Corporal and capital punishment (flogging, stocks, banishment, hanging). Jails held people awaiting trial or execution.

Pennsylvania era

1790s-1860s. Penitentiary idea: solitary confinement, reflection, repentance. Eastern State (1829-1970) and Western State (1826-2017). Probation began in 1841 with John Augustus.

Reformatory (Progressive) era

1870s-1920s. Elmira (1876), Zebulon Brockway. Education, work, early release for good behavior. Introduced indeterminate sentencing and supervised parole.

Medical/rehabilitation era

1930s-1960s. Rehabilitation and indeterminate sentences. Built on positive criminology: crime is like an illness to cure and treat.

Community era

1960s-1970s. Deinstitutionalization: halfway houses, work release, reintegration into the community.

Crime control era

1970s-2000s. "Nothing works" (Robert Martinson); longer prison terms and three strikes.

Which model are we in today?

The pendulum is swinging back toward rehabilitation and community corrections; New Jersey is a good example.

Classical criminology

Crime is a choice: people have free will and are rational; crime can be deterred; punishment should be certain, swift, and proportionate (Beccaria). Bentham: weigh pleasure vs. pain.

Neoclassical criminology

Choice with context: people differ in capacity for rational decision-making (age, development, coercion, impulsivity).

Positivist criminology

Scientific study of what influenced behavior: biology, psychology, social environment. Crime is caused or influenced, not just freely chosen.

Classical vs. positivist

Classical asks "Why did you choose crime?" (free will, rational choice, deterrence). Positivist asks "What influenced the behavior?" (biology, psychology, social environment).

Positivist approach to punishment

Treat the causes of crime rather than only punish: the medical model, rehabilitation, treatment, and indeterminate sentences.

Positivist lineage

Lombroso (19th century, "atavistic" criminals; discredited and racially biased) > Sheldon (body type and delinquency) > Raine (brain imaging; biology is one factor among many).

Indeterminate sentence

A range (e.g., 5-10 years); a parole board decides release. Linked to the medical/rehabilitation model.

Determinate sentence

A fixed term (e.g., 5 years), subject to rules and credits. Linked to the crime control era.

Rehabilitative impact: indeterminate vs. determinate

Indeterminate gives incentive to change (release depends on progress). Determinate offers less rehabilitative incentive and no parole board.

Concerns with indeterminate sentencing

Wide discretion led to inconsistent sentences for the same crimes, plus public discontent with rising crime and doubts that rehabilitation worked.

Sentencing Reform Act (1984)

Created the U.S. Sentencing Commission and federal sentencing guidelines to reduce inconsistency.

United States v. Booker (2005) / current status of federal guidelines

Guidelines are advisory. Judges keep discretion, but must give a specific reason in open court and in writing if they sentence outside the range.

Concurrent sentences

Served at the same time; shorter terms merge into the longest. Example: 3 and 5 years = 5 years total.

Consecutive sentences

Served one after another; terms are added. Usually based on offense severity. Example: 3 and 5 years = 8 years total.

Four goals of sentencing

Retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation.

Retribution

Deserved punishment: the offender is punished because they earned it.

Specific deterrence

Discourages the person being sentenced from reoffending.

General deterrence

Discourages other people by making consequences visible.

Incapacitation

Prevents further offending by removing the ability to offend (e.g., prison).

Rehabilitation

Supports behavioral change so the offender does not reoffend (treatment, education, job training).