You know Sackler–the former chairman of Purdue-Pharma, maker of Oxycontin. You also know John Oliver, which means you probably want to want to see this dramatic reading of Sackler’s deposition!
You don’t have to say that 3 times fast . . . or slow. We all know it’s true. Here is a study that confirms the point. While the article focuses on death penalty cases, its conclusions apply broadly. Want to challenge Strickland? This article is a place to start.
Here is The New Yorker’s review of Emily Bazelon’s new book, Charged, which looks at two cases where prosecutorial misconduct put 2 people through hell, why bail is hard to get, and why public defenders are often inadequate.
MULS Professor Michael O’Hear has a new article out: Managing the Risk of Violent Recidivism: Lessons from Legal Responses to Sexual Offenses. See the abstract below, and click here for the article. Read more
Spencer raised many issues on appeal: insufficient evidence to support his conviction, multiple ineffective assistance of counsel claims, and a Brady violation. This post focuses on the 2 most interesting claims: ineffective assistance for failure to move to suppress evidence obtain via a no-knock warrant and the DA’s failure to turn over evidence of an officer’s disciplinary history. Read more
In some parts of the country 40% of arrests stem from possession of marijuana. If you wonder how Wisconsin counties compare to others around the country, check out this article and map.
Today’s New York Times has this very interesting article (complete with some fancy digital demonstrations) about an enormous Google database employees call “Sensorvault,” which “turn[s] the business of tracking cellphone users’ locations into a digital dragnet for law enforcement.” It will not surprise you to learn that the use of the database may help crack cases without leads—or lead to the arrest of innocent people.
State v. Autumn Marie Love Lopez & Amy J. Rodriguez, 2017AP913-CR & 2017AP914-CR, petition for review granted 4/9/19; case activity (including briefs)
Does either Wis. Stat. § 971.36 or inherent prosecutorial charging discretion allow a prosecutor to charge a single felony count of retail theft for multiple separate acts of theft, each involving less than $500 in merchandise, committed over a span of time?