Criminal Law Reform
Featured
Arizona
Oct 2023
Criminal Law Reform
Racial Justice
Fund for Empowerment v. Phoenix, City of
Fund for Empowerment is a challenge to the City of Phoenix’s practice of conducting sweeps of encampments without notice, issuing citations to unsheltered people for camping and sleeping on public property when they have no place else to go, and confiscating and destroying their property without notice or process.
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2023
Criminal Law Reform
McElrath v. Georgia
Does the Double Jeopardy Clause bar an appellate court from reviewing and setting aside a jury’s verdicts of acquittal on the ground that the verdict is inconsistent with the jury’s verdict on other charges?
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2023
Criminal Law Reform
Pulsifer v. United States
This case involves the interpretation of a federal law that allows defendants to avoid mandatory minimum sentences for certain nonviolent drug crimes, allowing judges to impose sentences tailored to their individual circumstances.
Texas
Jul 2021
Criminal Law Reform
Prisoners' Rights
Sanchez et al v. Dallas County Sheriff et al
Decarceration has always been an emergency, a life and death proposition, but COVID-19 makes this effort intensely urgent. The ºìÐÓÊÓƵ has been working with our partners to litigate for the rights of those who are incarcerated and cannot protect themselves because of the policies of the institutions in which they are jailed.
All Cases
150 Criminal Law Reform Cases
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2009
Criminal Law Reform
+4 Issues
District Attorney's Office v. Osborne
Whether it violates due process to imprison someone who is actually innocent, and whether an inmate has a post-conviction right to obtain DNA evidence in the government's possession that could establish his innocence with total certainty. DECIDED
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2009
Criminal Law Reform
+4 Issues
District Attorney's Office v. Osborne
Whether it violates due process to imprison someone who is actually innocent, and whether an inmate has a post-conviction right to obtain DNA evidence in the government's possession that could establish his innocence with total certainty. DECIDED
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2008
Criminal Law Reform
+4 Issues
Vermont v. Brillon
Whether delays caused by systemic deficiencies in a state's indigent defense system can ever be charged against the state in deciding whether a criminal defendant has been denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. DECIDED
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2008
Criminal Law Reform
+4 Issues
Vermont v. Brillon
Whether delays caused by systemic deficiencies in a state's indigent defense system can ever be charged against the state in deciding whether a criminal defendant has been denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. DECIDED
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2008
Criminal Law Reform
+4 Issues
Van de Kamp v. Goldstein
Whether someone who was falsely imprisoned for 24 years based on the untrue testimony of a criminal informant can sue senior administrators in the prosecutor's office for their failure to maintain an even rudimentary record system that would have disclosed impeachment information about the informant prior to trial. DECIDED
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2008
Criminal Law Reform
+4 Issues
Van de Kamp v. Goldstein
Whether someone who was falsely imprisoned for 24 years based on the untrue testimony of a criminal informant can sue senior administrators in the prosecutor's office for their failure to maintain an even rudimentary record system that would have disclosed impeachment information about the informant prior to trial. DECIDED
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2008
Criminal Law Reform
Smart Justice
Pearson v. Callahan
Whether, absent an emergency, the Fourth Amendment permits the police to enter a home without a warrant based on an informant's signal that criminal activity is taking place inside. DECIDED
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2008
Criminal Law Reform
Smart Justice
Pearson v. Callahan
Whether, absent an emergency, the Fourth Amendment permits the police to enter a home without a warrant based on an informant's signal that criminal activity is taking place inside. DECIDED
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2008
Criminal Law Reform
+4 Issues
Herring v. United States
Whether the exclusionary rule requires the suppression of evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment when the Fourth Amendment violation was based on misinformation sent by law enforcement officials in another county.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2008
Criminal Law Reform
+4 Issues
Herring v. United States
Whether the exclusionary rule requires the suppression of evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment when the Fourth Amendment violation was based on misinformation sent by law enforcement officials in another county.