CRIMINAL PROCEDURES II
CJ 4151
SPRING 2002



Professor: Phyllis B. Gerstenfeld, J.D., Ph.D.
Office: C213G
Phone: 667-3229
E-mail:phyllisg@toto.csustan.edu

Required Texts:
Roberson, C. (2000). Criminal Procedure Today: Issues & Cases. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Zalman & Siegel (1995). Key Cases and Comments on Criminal Procedure. West Publishing.

Course Methods and Procedure:

This course will consist primarily of lecture and case study analysis. All students are expected and required to read the assigned cases in the text, and to be prepared to orally brief cases in class, and to engage in classroom discussion, dialog, or debate on class material and lectures.

A major graded portion of the class will require each student to perform extensive legal research on an assigned case. Students will work in pairs, research a controversial case assigned at the beginning of the semester, draft a Brief, and present Oral Arguments in class. All oral arguments will be presented in a quasi-judicial manner and will be videotaped.

Grading:

Grades will be based on the following criteria:
Case briefing, discussion, jury participation 15%
2 Examinations (20% each) 40%
Legal Brief 25%
Oral Argument 20%

Grades will be assessed as follows:

90 to 100 - A
80 to 89 - B
70 to 79 - C
60 to 69 - D
below 60 - F
Case briefing, discussion, jury participation:   You will be called on and expected to be able to orally brief the cases assigned in the readings for that day. Therefore, it is important that you complete the assigned readings on time and attend class regularly. Frequent absences or failure to be prepared for class will adversely affect your grade in this course.

You will also be expected to participate in classroom discussions of the issues raised by the cases.

During oral arguments, you will be assigned to a jury during another group's arguments. You will be expected to listen to the arguments carefully and reach a decision in the case. You will be graded on your participation during this process.

Examinations:

There will be two written, closed-book exams. These will consist primarily of true/false and multiple choice questions. They will be based on lectures and the assigned readings from the text, whether the readings are discussed in class or not.

 
Missed Exams:

No make-up exams will be given, as they are an extreme inconvenience to the instructor and the department secretary, and may be unfair to other students. Students who miss one of the regularly scheduled exams must instead take a comprehensive final. No other options will be offered.

In addition, students who have taken both regular exams but who wish to attempt to raise their test average may take the comprehensive final if they choose to do so. If they score higher on the final than on one of the regular exams, the final score will replace the original one. If they score lower on the final than on either regular exam, their original scores will not be affected (thus, taking the final cannot hurt a person's grade).

Students who take both of the regular exams and are satisfied with their scored do not need to take the final.
 

Legal brief and oral arguments:

More information will be given about these assignments in class. Click here for a refresher on writing appellate briefs.

 
CELL PHONES, BEEPERS, ETC.:

It's very disruptive when cell phones, beepers etc. go off in the middle of class. It's a discourtesy to both the instructor and your fellow students. Therefore, unless it is of absolutely vital importance that you be reached while in class (e.g, you are a surgeon on call, you're expecting a call from the President, your significant other is about to go into labor, etc.) turn off the ringer! If your electronic device rings, beeps, or otherwise makes noise during class, and you cannot demonstrate that it was vitally important that you keep the ringer on, you will be required to give a 15 minute oral presentation to the class on a topic of the instructor's choice.

Assignments:
 
 
 
Date Topic Cases  Readings (from theCrim Pro Today book)
Feb. 15 Introduction    
Feb. 18-20 Right to Counsel: Pre-Gideon
  • Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932)
  • Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455 (1942)
  • Feb. 22- 27 Right to Counsel: Post-Gideon
  • Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
  • Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353 (1963)
  • Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972)
  • Ross v. Moffitt, 417 U.S. 600 (1974)
  • Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975)
  • pp. 355-393
    Mar. 1-4 Right to Counsel: Effective Assistance
  • Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)
  • Nix v. Whiteside, 475 U.S. 157 (1986)
  • Ake v. Okalahoma, 470 U.S. 68 (1985)
  • Mar. 6-8 Confessions: Coerced Confessions
  • Brown v. Mississsippi, 297 U.S. 278 (1936)
  • Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 (1964)
  • Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279 (1991)
  • Mar. 11-15 Confessions: Miranda
  • Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 486 (1966)
  • Dickerson v. United States (2000)
  • New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984)
  • Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (1980)
  • Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 412 (1986)
  • Michigan v. Mosley, 423 U.S. 96 (1975) 
  • Minnick v. Mississippi, 498 U.S. 146 (1990) 
  • Illinois v. Perkins, 496 U.S. 292 (1990)
  • pp. 201-260
    Mar. 18-20 Review & Exam #1
    Mar. 22-25 Confessions: Massiah
  • Massiah v. United States, 377 U.S. 201 (1964)
  • Brewer v. Williams, 430 U.S. 387 (1977),
  • McNeil v. Wisconsin, 501 U.S. 171 (1991)
  • Mar. 27-Apr. 8 Identification
  • United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967) 
  • Kirby v. Illinois, 406 U.S. 682 (1972) 
  • Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (1972)
  • United States v. Ash, 413 U.S. 300 (1973) 
  • Manson v. Braithwaite, 432 U.S. 98 (1977)
  • pp. 294-315
    Apr. 10-19 Pretrial Process
  • United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987)
  • Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U.S. 1 (1970)
  • Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103 (1975) 
  • County of Riverside v. McLaughlin, 500 U.S. 44 (1991)
  • Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436 (1970), 
  • Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 (1985)
  • pp. 316-354
    Apr. 22-May 1 Grand jury & trial
  • Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) 
  • Doggett v. United States, 505 U.S. 647 (1992)
  • Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012 (1988) 
  • Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333 (1966)
  • Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986)
  • pp. 394-450
    May 3-6 Review & Exam #2    
    May 8-22 Oral Arguments    
    May 24 Final Exam



    Writing Appellate Briefs

    Return to Courses Page

    Return to CJ Home Page