HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017700.jpg

2.42 MB

Extraction Summary

2
People
4
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document / law review article excerpt
File Size: 2.42 MB
Summary

This document is an excerpt from a 2007 Utah Law Review article (page 65 of 78) submitted by David Schoen to the House Oversight Committee. It argues legally and ethically for the inclusion of specific victim notification requirements in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, referencing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). The text critiques the Advisory Committee for failing to incorporate a rule requiring victims be notified of their rights, drawing parallels to Miranda rights for defendants.

People (2)

Name Role Context
David Schoen Submitter/Lawyer
Name appears at the bottom of the document, indicating he likely submitted this document to the House Oversight Commi...
Cassell Author/Proponent
Mentioned in footnote 509 ('catalog Cassell proposals rejected'). Refers to Paul Cassell, arguing for victims' rights.

Organizations (4)

Name Type Context
House Oversight Committee
Indicated by the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017700'.
Advisory Committee
Refers to the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules, discussed regarding their incorporation of the CVRA.
Utah Law Review
Publisher of the article (2007 Utah L. Rev. 861).
President's Task Force of Victims of Crime
Cited as concluding in 1982 that prosecutors are best positioned to explain rights to victims.

Timeline (1 events)

1982
President's Task Force of Victims of Crime concluded prosecutors should explain legal significance to victims.
USA

Relationships (1)

Cassell Professional/Adversarial Advisory Committee
Footnote 509 notes the Advisory Committee rejected Cassell's proposals regarding notice of rights.

Key Quotes (4)

"As a policy matter, leaving out this right threatens to cripple crime victims' right to speak at bail, plea, and sentencing hearings."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017700.jpg
Quote #1
"If victims are unaware of their rights to speak, they may unwittingly forfeit that right."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017700.jpg
Quote #2
"Just as criminal defendants receive advice of their Miranda rights, victims should receive advice of their rights."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017700.jpg
Quote #3
"The government must use its best efforts to give the victim reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding involving the crime and of the rights the victim has at those proceedings."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017700.jpg
Quote #4

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (4,278 characters)

Page 65 of 78
2007 Utah L. Rev. 861, *952
their rights [in the CVRA]." 507 Because the Advisory Committee's promised approach was to "incorporate, but not go beyond, the rights created by the statute," 508 it is surprising to see that the Committee decided not to incorporate the CVRA's right for victims to be "notified of ... their rights." Here again, perhaps it simply overlooked this right of victims. 509
As a policy matter, leaving out this right threatens to cripple crime victims' right to speak at bail, plea, and sentencing hearings. If victims are unaware of their rights to speak, they may unwittingly forfeit that right. Of course, few victims are knowledgeable about the steps in the criminal justice process. Just as criminal defendants receive advice of their Miranda rights, victims should receive advice of their rights.
Although the Committee did not justify its decision to exclude the right to notice, it might conceivably argue that because this right does not involve the conduct of a public judicial proceeding, it does not belong in the Rules. The Committee advanced such an argument to defend its decision to ignore some other aspects of the CVRA in its proposed rule changes. 510
Such an argument, at least if advanced with respect to notice issues, would lack merit. First, and most important, the rights at issue are directly bound up with judicial proceedings: at issue is notice about the right to speak at bail, plea, and sentencing proceedings. Moreover, this right directly bears on those proceedings. It is designed to ensure that a judge at these hearings will have all relevant information, including information from crime victims.
Second, it is not true that the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure only cover judicial proceedings. To provide a few straightforward examples: Rule 11 authorizes prosecutors and defense attorneys to "discuss and reach a plea agreement"; 511 Rule 16 provides that, upon request, a prosecutor "must permit the defendant to inspect and to copy or photograph books, papers, documents, data, photographs, tangible objects, buildings or places, or copies or portions of any of these items, if the item is within the government's possession, custody, or control"; 512 Rule 41 requires a police officer executing a search warrant to "give a copy of the warrant and a receipt for the property taken to the person from whom [*953] ... the property was taken"; 513 and Rule 49 requires parties to serve their legal pleadings on each other. 514 Although these rights may have some ultimate effect on a court proceeding, none of them involves the conduct of a judicial proceeding. If they are "in bounds" for the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the subject of notice about rights to a hearing would seem to fit comfortably as well.
Turning to how to draft a rule giving victims notice of their rights, it is easy to reformulate my proposal so that it tracks the more abbreviated style preferred by the Advisory Committee. Such a rule would read as follows (underlined language being added to the Advisory Committee's proposed language):
(1) Notice of a Proceeding. The government must use its best efforts to give the victim reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding involving the crime and of the rights the victim has at those proceedings.
It is not unreasonable to ask prosecutors to give victims notice of their rights. As long ago as 1982, the President's Task Force of Victims of Crime concluded that the prosecutor is "in the best position to explain to victims the legal significance of various motions and proceedings." 515 The Attorney General Guidelines for Victim and Witness Assistance already require
________________________________________
507 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1) (emphases added).
508 Advisory Committee Report, supra note 69, at 2.
509 See id. at 17-20 (purporting to catalog Cassell proposals rejected; notice of rights not included).
510 See id. at 13 (listing rights that "seem to fall outside the parameters of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure).
511 Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1).
512 Id. 16(a)(1)(E).
513 Id. 41(f)(1)(C) (Supp. 2007).
514 Id. 49(a)-(b).
515 President's Task Force, Final Report, supra note 8, at 64.
DAVID SCHOEN
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017700

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document