1/ A former (& talented) student of mine @UARKLaw—Marion Humphrey—was subjected to race-based policing by the AR. St. Police. As a dean & scholar who is deeply committed to issues of crim. law & procedure, I can’t sit by w/o comment. So, let’s talk. THREAD arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/…
2/ The stop: The officer alleged he stopped Marion for “changing lanes too quickly.” Maybe he did, but the dashcam footage I’ve seen doesn’t support that claim. My take: The officer stopped Marion because he’s a young black male who was driving a rented U-Haul on the interstate.
3/ The stop (cont.): Yes, pretextual stops are constitutional so long as police have a valid basis for the stop (Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) needs revisiting), but that hardly means pretextual stops are normatively appropriate.
4/ Extension of stop: After Marion exercised his right to refuse consent to search the U-Haul, the officer extended the traffic stop based on a general claim of reasonable suspicion.
5/ Extension of stop (cont.): But that suspicion was untethered to any *particular* criminal activity. The extension of the stop lacked constitutional support and was therefore unlawful.
6/ Duration of stop: Marion was forced to wait 28 min for a drug dog to arrive. This constituted a de facto arrest (an arrest unsupported by prob. cause). SCOTUS & the AR Sup. Ct. agree that an “arrest on mere suspicion collides violently with the basic human rights of liberty.”
7/ The dog alert: After the dog arrived, it alerted at the front of the U-Haul, an area outside the view of the dashcam. Thus, we are unable to discern the circumstances that led to the dog alert or whether an alert even occurred.
8/ The arrest & search: The dog alert caused two problematic police reactions. First, Marion was formally arrested. But SCOTUS precedent is clear: A dog alert to a vehicle permits a warrantless search of the vehicle.
9/ The arrest & search (cont.): A dog alert does not—repeat, does NOT—permit a warrantless arrest of a vehicle occupant. Here, officers conflated probable cause to search the U-Haul with probable cause to arrest Marion. This clip illustrates the devastating nature of that error.
10/ Second, police searched the rear compartment of the U-Haul and the *contents* of Marion’s personal belongings (in addition to the front passenger area, which is where the alert ostensibly occurred).
11/ From a professionalism standpoint, the officer said the following to Marion: (1) Marion: “Am I under arrest?” Off: “Well, not when I get those handcuffs off you won’t be.”; (2) Off: “You haven’t lost any humanity.”; & (3) Off: “Next time just don’t get pulled over.”
12/ Summary: I find it disheartening & exhausting to learn about race-based policing fueled by a dramatic misunderstanding of basic criminal procedure principles. But I’m proud of Marion for his composure under the circumstances. For so many reasons, I condemn what happened here.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ My heart breaks for the victims of the Robb Elementary School shooting. Like many, my heart hurts in different ways. 🧵
2/ My heart hurts as a parent who hugged his kids a little harder today, as a higher ed leader who believes it does not have to be this way, and as a crim law scholar who knows that the gunman’s use specifically of an AR-15 was preventable. Let me explain.
3/ In 1994, Congress passed the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act — known as the “assault weapons ban.” congress.gov/bill/103rd-con…
1/ Circling back on the #Cosby opinion to focus on one problem: the remedy. So, why not suppress his deposition testimony & remand for retrial? Seems reasonable, and the concurring & dissenting opinion (CDO) pointed it out, but according to the majority...
2/ "Our disagreement with the CDO arises concerning its view that mere suppression of Cosby’s deposition testimony will remedy his constitutional harm and 'fully' restore him to where he stood before he detrimentally relied upon D.A. Castor’s inducement." pacourts.us/assets/opinion…
3/ "This perspective understates the gravity of Cosby’s harm in this case, and suppression alone is insufficient to provide a full remedy of the consequences of the due process violation."
1/ I have so enjoyed watching the impressive anti-racism efforts of law schools—including my own. #LegalEd has a long way to go, but we’re doing the work. As we do, though, I can’t help but feel tension between this work and the US News rankings. THREAD aals.org/antiracist-cle…
2/ For those outside the loop, the US News rankings incentivize law school admission practices that alienate students from historically underrepresented backgrounds—e.g., those identifying as American Indian, Asian, Black, Hispanic, Native Hawaiian. lssse.indiana.edu/wp-content/upl…
3/ Let me explain via an illustrative example from my friend, @TheEdLawProf (whose work I recommend). In his piece, “The Marginalization of Black Aspiring Lawyers,” @FIULAWREVIEW, Taylor writes:
1/ Let's talk about some of the problems with the grand jury's decision not to indict the officers responsible for killing #BreonnaTaylor [Thread] cnn.com/2020/09/23/us/…
2/ Let's start with some background (I promise it's relevant and short): first, as a general matter, a grand jury is asked to consider presented evidence and decide whether probable cause exists to believe that a crime has been committed by one or more individuals.
3/ second, the grand jury is an independent body - disconnected from any branch of government. It deliberates in secret and the prosecutor is the only attorney presenting evidence. There is no obligation to present exculpatory evidence and/or defenses.
1/ [Short thread] A few comments as await a decision from the grand jury about whether the officers who shot and killed #BreonnaTalyor will be criminally charged. nbcnews.com/news/us-news/l…
2/ To begin with, it's the right call to rely on the grand jury here - it provides independence to a charging decision that would ...otherwise fall within the province of the prosecutor's discretion. Now, please know that grand jury proceedings are secret so we will not learn...
3/ either what the prosecution presented or the rationale for the grand jury's decision. Also, jeopardy does not attach at the grand jury phase, which means that a grand jury that chooses not to indict has no constitutional impact from a charging perspective.
I have participated for months in the Oregon and broader #DiplomaPrivilege conversations. For those advocating for diploma privilege, I thought you might appreciate the views of one dean. With thanks to @sjdprods & @profdaf who helped guide my thinking, let me offer a thread.
As a law school, we were confident that our graduates could pass the bar exam--under pre-pandemic circumstances. But, to state the obvious, the conditions for the upcoming exam will be, at best, uncertain.
To be sure, the Oregon Bar did its best to provide a socially distant exam, as I'm sure all bar examiners will, but neither we nor any Bar can be confident about how the public health guidance will shift between now and later this month.