|
Home
|
|
Justice Dept. To Launch Indigent Defense Program |
|
NPR News The U.S. criminal justice system typically pits defense lawyers against government prosecutors. Now, defense lawyers who represent poor clients are about to get some major help from their usual adversaries.
The Justice Department is on the verge of launching a new program to help low-income people receive legal help. It's called the Access to Justice initiative, and one of the top constitutional lawyers in the country is taking a leave of absence from Harvard to spearhead the project.
Although there has been no official announcement, a Justice spokesperson has confirmed the plans.
Professor Laurence Tribe of Harvard Law will begin work in Washington next week as senior counselor for Access to Justice. He will coordinate with judges and lawyers across the country with the goal of finding ways to help people who cannot afford a lawyer — a circumstance known in legal terms as indigent defense. |
|
Read more...
|
|
By B John Burns
February 11, 2010
I rarely look at unpublished Court of Appeals decisions, and almost never comment upon them. When I do review them, I’m looking for one thing. You know what it is.
The Court of Appeals published about a thousand opinions today. Our Court of Appeals judges and staff are very hard workers. None of their opinions today, however, contained what I was looking for.
I took a particular interest in State v. Randall Lee Pals, written by Judge Edward Mansfield.
Judge Mansfield is new on the Court, and he has a really impressive resume. Like all great legal writers, he’s originally from Massachusetts. He earned his undergraduate degree at Harvard, and his law degree at Yale. He clerked for a judge on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. From 2004 to 2006 he chaired the Trade Regulation Section of the Iowa State Bar Association.
I don’t know him personally, but he’s got to be a real smart guy. This is a relatively young (I think he’s my age) judge who, before it’s all over, may find himself vying for a seat on the Iowa Supreme Court, or in federal court. I don’t know if he’s looking in those directions, but it goes without saying that everything he writes today will be scrutinized when those days come.
So, after reading the Pals opinion, I’d like to offer some humble, unsolicited advice. I would suggest, Judge Mansfied, that you consider opening your opinions in criminal cases with a cite to Burns, 4A Iowa Practice: Criminal Procedure, and not to “Who Let the Dogs Out?”.
You can take that for what it’s worth. |
|
|
Innocence Project of Iowa |
By Brian Farrell
The Innocence Project of Iowa is a nonprofit organization that seeks to prevent and remedy wrongful convictions in the State of Iowa through education, systemic reform, and remedial case work. The Project is actively involved in policy work aimed at strengthening Iowa’s criminal justice system to ensure the integrity of convictions. It also reviews inmate requests for assistance. Cases meeting certain criteria are considered for further investigation which may lead to litigation on the inmate’s behalf.
The Project was founded in the spring of 2007 by a group of attorneys, professors, and students committed to the prevention of wrongful convictions and the exoneration of innocent persons. The Project has no paid staff but relies on entirely on volunteers. Case intake and initial screening is completed by the paralegal program at Iowa Lakes Community College, while policy work and case investigation is largely conducted by law and journalism students from the University of Iowa under the supervision of faculty and attorneys. The Project is an Iowa nonprofit corporation and is a member of the nationwide Innocence Network.
As an all-volunteer organization, the Innocence Project of Iowa is continually assembly a database of attorneys willing to assist with cases should a need arise in their community or area of expertise. It also welcome offers of professional assistance in ongoing organizational work such as fundraising and public education. The Project greatly appreciates all financial assistance, including contributions through the United Way. Inquiries can be directed to Brian Farrell at
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
|
|
By B John Burns
February 10, 2010
Last Thursday, Steve Japuntich sent this email to all of the public defenders in Iowa:
Building upon the recent Melendez-Diaz decision, Briscoe was reversed without comment (save ordering the Supreme Court of Virginia to apply Melendez-Diaz). I have enclosed a copy of defendant’s app for cert. In a nutshell, this is a drug case wherein the State has a statute allowing defendant’s to demand in-court testimony by State lab experts (much like Iowa). Defendant didn’t demand in court testimony, the Supreme Court of Virginia held that by failing to call the lab experts, defendant waived his right to confrontation. The U.S. Sct. Reversed for application of Melendez-Diaz. When M-D was issued I contacted our old friend B. John Burns for his take on the applicability of M-D to this situation. B. John believed that it would apply under the circumstances present in Briscoe (based upon Iowa law). B. John was right (if I understand what transpired here). May the force be with you.
When I received Steve’s email, I wrote this response that I intended to go out to everyone on Steve’s recipient list:
If you get a chance to read the oral argument transcript in Briscoe, Justice Scalia was pretty put off that the question was coming up again, since he thought he'd clearly answered it in Melendez-Diaz. The only reason to take a case like Briscoe would be to roll back Melendez-Diaz, much like the Court rolled back his sweeping ruling in Coy v. Iowa in Maryland v. Craig. This time, however, it didn't happen.
Because I use the mighty Mediacom as my internet provider, however, my message has just sat undelivered in the outbox for five days. Too many recipients. If I wanted to break you down into groups of twenty-five, I could have done it that way. At least once a week I have to tell myself that, for a measly $210 a month, I should be thankful for any morsels of the Mediacom service that happen to be functioning on a particular day.
Anyway, that’s my comment about Melendez Diaz. |
|
|
NAS Report on Forensic Science - A Must Read |
By Brian Farrell
A year ago, the National Academy of Sciences issued a landmark report on the state of forensic science in the United States. This Congressionally-mandated report concluded that there are significant problems in the way science is used in criminal proceedings. It found a troubling lack of uniformity in the admission and use of scientific evidence. With the exception of DNA evidence, the report found that “no forensic method has been rigorously shown to have the capacity to consistently, and with a high degree of certainty, demonstrate a connection between evidence and a specific individual or source.” This paucity of research on the validity and reliability of forensic methods is coupled with a lack of autonomy, accreditation, and uniformity in many crime labs nationally. (This is less a concern for us here in Iowa. The Iowa DCI Criminalistics Laboratory is one of 371 laboratories to be accredited by the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors Laboratory Accreditation Board. Director Bruce Reeve additionally informs me that, although not required, many DCI criminalists are certified in their respective disciplines.)
The report provides excellent information on the potential shortcomings of numerous forensic methods which have regularly been relied on in criminal trials. It also provides a bold outline for reforms aimed at strengthening the reliability of forensic methods in the United States. This includes more greatly involving the scientific community in the “gatekeeper” role that is now exclusively occupied by the courts.
The report is available for purchase as a hard copy, and is also available for free online. The executive summary, which provides a great overview of the report and its recommendations, is available as an easy-to-read PDF file (in the “Download Free” box toward the lower right side of the center). The entire report is available as slightly-less-reader-friendly web pages further down (labeled “Table of Contents”).
|
|
| << Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
| | Results 16 - 20 of 131 |
|
|
Poems From Guantanamo
Published by the University of Iowa Press
|
