Michael M. O’Hear – Page 34 – Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

Restorative Justice Conference to Consider Healing for Family Members of Homicide Victims

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:February 11, 2013
Post category:Criminal Law & Process Public Speakers at Marquette

I’m looking forward to this year’s annual Restorative Justice Conference, “The Death Penalty Versus Life Without Parole: Comparing the Healing Impact on Victims’ Families and the Community.” The conference was inspired by a fascinating empirical study comparing the long-run experiences of family members of homicide victims in Texas, which has the death penalty, and Minnesota, which does not. Authored by Marilyn Peterson Armour and Mark S. Umbreit and forthcoming in the Marquette Law Review, the article concludes that the Minnesota family members achieved a higher level of physical, psychological, and behavioral health.

The conference kicks off with a keynote address by Armour (pictured here) at 4:30 on February 21. The following day will include several panels providing a diverse set of first-hand perspectives on the impact of homicide, capital punishment, and the criminal process on family members, lawyers, judges, and many others. Additional information about the conference is available here.

Welcome, February Bloggers

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:February 2, 2013
Post category:Public

Our guest bloggers in February are 3L Priya Barnes and Douglas Hoffer ’10. Many thanks to our January guests, 2L Marisa Kasriel and Al Rohmeyer ’10.

Bond’s Back: SCOTUS to Take Another Look at Case on Federalism and Criminal Law

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:January 20, 2013
Post category:Constitutional Law Criminal Law & Process Federal Criminal Law & Process Public U.S. Supreme Court

The recent suicide of Aaron Swartz has provoked a great deal of public discussion of what many consider to be overreaching by federal prosecutors in his case. In the view of some critics, Swartz’s theft of academic articles from JSTOR would have been more properly handled as a minor property offense in state court. Instead, Swartz found himself in federal court facing a possible 35 years in prison and a set of charges invoking a variety of obscure federal criminal statutes.

Whatever the merits of the criticisms, they have served to draw public attention to the extraordinary power exercised by federal prosecutors and the uncertain line between what is most appropriately handled in state court and what is most appropriately handled in federal.

Although the Swartz litigation is now presumably over, another case that has provoked similar charges of prosecutorial overreaching is now on its way to the Supreme Court . . . for a second time.