Courts increasingly use neuroscience and genetic evidence (“neurogenetic evidence”) to shed light on various aspects of a defendant’s mental state and behavior. The evidence is particularly prevalent in cases involving defendants with mental illnesses and is used to determine issues of mental capacity, personal responsibility, and treatability. However, using neurogenetic evidence risks framing mental illness […]
Circumventing Concepcion: Conceptualizing Innovative Strategies to Ensure the Enforcement of Consumer Protection Laws in the Age of the Inviolable Class Action Waiver
In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, class action waivers have become seemingly invulnerable to attack. Class action attorneys have become dispirited that consumer rights seem impossible to enforce. While the Federal Arbitration Act has been written about at length, this Note adds to that scholarship by proposing several […]
People v. Robinson: Developments and Problems in the Use of John Doe DNA Arrest Warrants
Last year, the California Supreme Court decided People v. Robinson, a case in which the defendant was convicted of rape for an incident that occurred in 1994. DNA evidence gathered at the scene provided extraordinarily persuasive evidence that he was the perpetrator. Despite this evidence, the case was unusual for an important reason: authorities did […]