For the week of July 12, 2010 (cross-posted from the Central District Federal Public Defender blog).
The "Lie to Me" Effect. Watching the television drama "Lie to Me" makes viewers think they're better at detecting lies. Truth be told, it only makes them worse. That, according to research discussed here.
Is That a Fact? The Boston Globe reports on research findings suggesting that persons with erroneous beliefs who are exposed to factual corrections not only don't generally change their minds to conform to new evidence, but actually become more set in their prior beliefs. The studies noted in the article can be found here and here.
True Stories about False Confessions. Why would anyone confess to horrible crimes they didn't commit? "Seemingly unfathomable, it happens far more often than most people believe, experts say." So reports the Chicago Tribune.
Because There's No Better Adrenaline Rush. Ever wondered how interdiction officers bring in the big-time drug hauls? Now, you too can know their secrets - for only $29.95. (H/T Simple Justice.)
Top of the Ninth - 9th Cir. decisions released during the week.
Perdomo v. Holder (immigration) (gender may be appropriate basis for asylum).
Rhoades v. Henry
(habeas) (trial counsel's decision not to use expert testimony about
defendant's drug use and other arguably mitigating social history
because of possible negative impact on innocence theory was not IAC)
(imposition of death sentence did not violate Eighth Amendment).
U.S. v. Avila-Anguiano
(district court had jurisdiction to revisit sentence on one count after
reversal of sentences based only on other counts) (under circumstances,
2K2.4(b) cross referenced statute in effect at time of crime rather
than at time of sentencing).
U.S. v. Guizar (denying without prejudice defense counsel's Anders motion).
Pirtle v. California Board of Prison Terms (habeas) (denial of parole violated due process).
Banuelos-Ayon v. Holder
(immigration) (California Penal Code § 273.5 corporal injury to a
spouse/cohabitant is categorical crime of domestic violence under 18
U.S.C. § 16(a)).
U.S. v. Hinkson
(denial of rehearing by limited and full en banc court) (district court
did not abuse its discretion in denying motion for new trial based on
newly discovered impeachment evidence).
U.S. v. Broussard (for sentencing on violation of supervised release post-Booker, Carpenter rule limits district judge to statutory rather than guidelines maximum).
Quezada v. Scribner (habeas) (remanding for evidentiary hearing on alleged newly discovered evidence of Brady violation).
SCOTUS Focus. The Supreme Court is in recess until October 4.
Short Circuits - other persuasive authority.
U.S. v. Alston (4th Cir.) (prosecutor's proffer on factual basis for Alford plea does not satisfy requirements of modified categorical approach under Shepard).
U.S. v. Luck (4th Cir.) (failure to request informant instruction was IAC).
U.S. v. Nicholson
(4th Cir.) (trial counsel's failure to pursue departure from ACCA in
felon-in-possession case was due to conflict of interest, where
defendant had claimed, and government had conceded, that he got the gun
for protection against co-defendant; remanded for resentencing before
different judge).
U.S. v. Andino-Ortega
(5th Cir.) (counsel's acknowledgment that "crime of violence"
enhancement was proper was based on misunderstanding of precedent and
therefore did not waive the issue; district court's application of that
enhancement to Texas injury to a child was plain error).
U.S. v. Arberry,
U.S. v. Johnson (7th Cir.) (sentencing court must consider all
nonfrivolous arguments and explain sentence or sentence will be
reversed).
U.S. v. Camacho-Arellano
(district court may vary from immigration sentencing guidelines based
on fast-track disparity; decision leaves circuits split on issue 3-3).
U.S. v. Strandlof (D. Colo.) (Stolen Valor Act is unconstitutional).
For the Bookworms - New books and scholarly articles of note.
· "Status as Punishment: A Critical Guide to Padilla v. Kentucky," Gabriel J. Chin & Margaret Colgate Love, Crim. J. (forthcoming) (SSRN) (argues that the logic of Padilla
extends to other severe and certain collateral consequences of
conviction; describes current efforts by ABA and ULC to enable and
regularize adequate advice about collateral consequences).
· "Significant
Statistics: The Unwitting Policy Making of Mathematically Ignorant
Judges," Michael I. Meyerson, Pepperdine L. Rev. (forthcoming, 2010) (SSRN) (argues
that judges' mathematical ignorance has permitted numerical analysis to
subvert legal system's goals, with particular attention to effect on
presumption of innocence in paternity cases, unnecessary injection of
race through statistics in DNA matching, improper use of race- and
gender-based statistics in tort context, and risk allocation in
securities fraud).
· Hard Cases in Wicked Legal Systems: Pathologies of Legality, David Dyzenhaus (2d ed. 2010) (Amazon)
(using the South African Apartheid regime as a test case of a "wicked"
legal regime, discusses how particular conceptions of law determine the
reasoning both of judges whose decisions support the regime and of
judges whose decisions resist it).
___________________
Suggestions or corrections? Email Michael_Drake@fd.org.
