Criminal Law Reform
Featured
Arizona
Oct 2023
Criminal Law Reform
Racial Justice
Fund for Empowerment v. Phoenix, City of
Fund for Empowerment is a challenge to the City of Phoenix’s practice of conducting sweeps of encampments without notice, issuing citations to unsheltered people for camping and sleeping on public property when they have no place else to go, and confiscating and destroying their property without notice or process.
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2023
Criminal Law Reform
McElrath v. Georgia
Does the Double Jeopardy Clause bar an appellate court from reviewing and setting aside a jury’s verdicts of acquittal on the ground that the verdict is inconsistent with the jury’s verdict on other charges?
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2023
Criminal Law Reform
Pulsifer v. United States
This case involves the interpretation of a federal law that allows defendants to avoid mandatory minimum sentences for certain nonviolent drug crimes, allowing judges to impose sentences tailored to their individual circumstances.
Texas
Jul 2021
Criminal Law Reform
Prisoners' Rights
Sanchez et al v. Dallas County Sheriff et al
Decarceration has always been an emergency, a life and death proposition, but COVID-19 makes this effort intensely urgent. The ³Ô¹ÏÖ±²¥ has been working with our partners to litigate for the rights of those who are incarcerated and cannot protect themselves because of the policies of the institutions in which they are jailed.
All Cases
141 Criminal Law Reform Cases
Missouri
Feb 2020
Criminal Law Reform
David v. Missouri
As of January 2020, over 4,600 individuals, roughly 600 of whom are currently in pretrial detention, were on the waiting list for an attorney in the State of Missouri. These individuals have been charged with crimes and have already qualified for a court-appointed attorney but are being forced to wait for an indeterminate amount of time for one to become available due to an overburdened indigent defense system. As a result, a criminal defendant will likely wait months, or sometimes even years, before they are assigned an attorney.
Explore case
Missouri
Feb 2020
Criminal Law Reform
David v. Missouri
As of January 2020, over 4,600 individuals, roughly 600 of whom are currently in pretrial detention, were on the waiting list for an attorney in the State of Missouri. These individuals have been charged with crimes and have already qualified for a court-appointed attorney but are being forced to wait for an indeterminate amount of time for one to become available due to an overburdened indigent defense system. As a result, a criminal defendant will likely wait months, or sometimes even years, before they are assigned an attorney.
Oklahoma
Feb 2020
Criminal Law Reform
Smart Justice
White, et al. v. Hesse, et al.
In Oklahoma cash bail is being used keep poor people behind bars. In Canadian County, Oklahoma if you have the money, you get out of jail. If you are poor, you stay in. That’s why we sued.
Explore case
Oklahoma
Feb 2020
Criminal Law Reform
Smart Justice
White, et al. v. Hesse, et al.
In Oklahoma cash bail is being used keep poor people behind bars. In Canadian County, Oklahoma if you have the money, you get out of jail. If you are poor, you stay in. That’s why we sued.
Court Case
Nov 2019
Criminal Law Reform
Tucker, et al. vs. State of Idaho, et al.
The ³Ô¹ÏÖ±²¥, the ³Ô¹ÏÖ±²¥ of Idaho, and Hogan Lovells LLP filed a class action lawsuit in 2015 against the State of Idaho over its defective public defense system.
Explore case
Court Case
Nov 2019
Criminal Law Reform
Tucker, et al. vs. State of Idaho, et al.
The ³Ô¹ÏÖ±²¥, the ³Ô¹ÏÖ±²¥ of Idaho, and Hogan Lovells LLP filed a class action lawsuit in 2015 against the State of Idaho over its defective public defense system.
North Carolina
Nov 2019
Criminal Law Reform
Smart Justice
Allison, et al. v. Allen, et al.
Explore case
North Carolina
Nov 2019
Criminal Law Reform
Smart Justice
Allison, et al. v. Allen, et al.
California
Oct 2019
Criminal Law Reform
Cross v. SFPD
Our Constitution promises all people, regardless of their race, equal protection under the laws. Accordingly, courts have long recognized that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits selective enforcement of criminal laws based on race. Yet law enforcement officers of the City of San Francisco have repeatedly violated that clause, singling out Black people for enforcement.
Explore case
California
Oct 2019
Criminal Law Reform
Cross v. SFPD
Our Constitution promises all people, regardless of their race, equal protection under the laws. Accordingly, courts have long recognized that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits selective enforcement of criminal laws based on race. Yet law enforcement officers of the City of San Francisco have repeatedly violated that clause, singling out Black people for enforcement.