COURSE SYLLABUS:
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE I [amended 4/22/2015]
Washington College of Law
American University
Summer Semester 2015
May 26-July 23, 2015
T & Th, 6:30-8:45 p.m.
Instructor: Brent E. Newton,
Deputy Staff Director,
U.S. Sentencing Commission
(202) 202-0068
email: ben5@law.georgetown.edu
Casebook: Chemerinsky & Levenson, Criminal Procedure: Investigation (Aspen 2013, second
edition) (paperback)
Note about class schedule: Rather than having 18 classes that go from 6:30-8:27 p.m., we will
have 16 classes, each going from 6:30-8:42 p.m. (2112 total minutes of instruction; minimum of
2100 minutes required by ABA accreditation standards). I will let you know on which two
Tuesday(s) and/or Thursday(s) we will not meet during the semester.
Note about reading assignments: You may skip dissenting and concurring opinions in the
assigned Supreme Court cases (unless you are told otherwise); focus on the majority
opinions. For some classes, supplemental cases are listed. You can access those cases on
Westlaw or Lexis. When a supplemental Supreme Court decision is assigned, you may
simply read the Court’s official “syllabus” for the case (which is a short, official summary
of the majority position) rather than read the entire case. The Court’s syllabi can be found at
the beginning of each reported case. If a per curiam decision is assigned, please read the entire
opinion (which generally is short).
Class Number & Topic
1. Course introduction &
Overview of criminal process
Assignment
Casebook (“CB”), pp. 1-30 (skim); pp. 31-59 (read)
[read Justice Harlan’s concurring opinion in Katz on
pp. 36-37 and Justices Sotomayor and Alito’s
concurring opinions in Jones on pp. 42-48]
Also, read the Supreme Court’s syllabus in Bond v.
United States, 529 U.S. 334 (2000)
2. 4th Amendment
CB, pp. 59-121 [read Justice O’Connor’s
concurring opinion in Riley on pp.65-66]
Also, read the Supreme Court’s syllabi in Florida v.
Jardines, 133 S. Ct. 1409 (2013); Florida v. Harris,
133 S. Ct. 1050 (2013); Arizona v. Johnson, 555
U.S. 323 (2009); and Rodriguez v. United States,
2015 WL 1780927 (SCOTUS April 21, 2015).
3. 4th Amendment
CB, pp. 121-26 (read); pp. 126-32 (skim); pp. 13265 (read)
Also read the Court’s syllabi in Bailey v. United
States, 133 S. Ct. 1031 (2013), and Missouri v.
McNeely, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (2013)
4. 4th Amendment
CB, pp. 165-212
Also read the Court’s syllabi in Florida v. Wells,
495 U.S. 1 (1990); Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S.
177 (1990); Fernandez v. California, 134 S. Ct.
1126 (2014); Heien v. North Carolina, 135 S. Ct.
530 (2014); also read United States v. Nervis, 2005
WL 2206200 (S.D. Tex. 2005)
5. 4th Amendment
CB, pp. 222-93
Also, read the Court’s syllabus in Maryland v.
King, 133 S. Ct. 1958 (2013)
6. 4th Amendment
CB, pp. 293-358
Also read the Court’s syllabi in Santana v. United
States, 427 U.S. 38 (1976), and Navarette v.
California, 134 S. Ct. __ (4/22/2014); also, read
United States v. Davis, 2008 WL 4372705 (S.D.
Tex. 2008)
7. 4th Amendment
CB, pp. 373-458
Also read Fahy v. Connecticut, 375 U.S. 85 (1963)
8. 5th Amendment/Confessions
CB, pp. 459-532
9. 5th Amendment/Confessions
CB, pp. 532-96
Also read the Court’s syllabi in Florida v. Powell,
130 S. Ct. 1195 (2010); and Howes v. Fields, 132 S.
Ct. 1181 (2012)
10. 6th Amendment Right to Counsel/
Confessions
11. Pretrial Identifications/
Misc. 5th Amendment issues
CB, pp. 596-632
Also, read the Court’s syllabus in Rothergy v.
Gillespie County, 554 U.S. 191 (2008)
CB, pp. 632-655, 657-705
Also read Sturgeon v. Quarterman 615 F. Supp.2d
546, 573-75 (S.D. Tex. 2009)
12 & 13. Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel
(other than confessions)
CB, pp. 707-48
Also read the Court’s syllabi in Missouri v. Frye,
132 S. Ct. 1399 (2012); Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct.
1376 (2012); Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356
(2010); Mickens v. Taylor, 535 U.S. 162 (2002);
and Bell v. Cone, 535 U.S. 685 (2002)
14. Effective Assistance of Counsel Cont’d
Read: Hinton v. Alabama, 134 S. Ct. 1081 (2014) (per curiam); Bobby v. Van Hook, 130 S. Ct.
13 (2009) (per curiam); Porter v. McCollum, 130 S. Ct. 447 (2009) (per curiam); Wong v.
Belmontes, 130 S. Ct. 383 (2009) (per curiam); Sturgeon v. Quarterman, 615 F. Supp.2d 546,
559-66 (S.D. Tex. 2009); Burdine v. Johnson, 262 F.3d 336 (5th Cir. 2001) (en banc) (maj. op.
only)
15. Appellate Issues (Standards of Review,
Retroactivity, Harmless-Error Review,
and Error Preservation)
16. Course Review
Handout will be emailed to students
FINAL EXAM: The three-hour final exam will consist of one essay question and several short
factual hypotheticals which each raise a single legal issue. The instructor will discuss the format
of the exam closer to the time it is given.
ATTENDANCE POLICY: In accordance with the ABA’s 80% attendance policy, students are
expected to attend at least 13 of the 16 classes, although legitimate excuses for missed classes
will permit students to listen to podcasts of missed classes in lieu of live attendance.
GRADING: Students’ grades will be based primarily on their exam scores. However, class
participation can raise a student’s grade by one “notch” (e.g., from a B+ to an A-).