Relief from the Collateral Consequences of a Criminal Conviction: A State-By-State Resource Guide

A collection of individual state documents that can be downloaded. Includes state law regarding loss of rights due to a felony conviction, process of restoration, pardon/expungement information, and contact information of corresponding agencies

Of Pardons, Politics and Collar Buttons: Reflections on the President\u27s Duty to be Merciful

A discussion of the President\u27s ability to grant Federal Pardons, and the moral and political factors which influence the exercise of that power. The article proposes that the President has a duty to pardon, not so much as to do justice in particular cases, but to be merciful as a more general obligation of office

Collateral Consequences After Padilla v. Kentucky: From Punishment to Regulation

This Article analyzes the scope of Padilla v. Kentucky, concluding that its logic extends beyond deportation to many other severe and certain consequences of conviction that are imposed by operation of law rather than by the sentencing court. It proposes a set of reforms that would limit the disruptive effect of these so-called “collateral consequences” on the guilty plea process and make a defense lawyer’s job easier. Part I describes a case currently pending in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court that may yield some important clues about how broadly the Padilla doctrine will be applied to status-generated consequences other than deportation. At issue in Commonwealth v. Abraham is whether a retired public school teacher should have been warned by his lawyer that pleading guilty to a misdemeanor sex offense would result in the permanent forfeiture of his vested pension benefits. Part II looks at the collateral consequences doctrine as applied by the courts before Padilla to demonstrate its weakness in the Sixth Amendment context. It then examines the Padilla decision itself and its progeny to date and proposes a test for determining when a lawyer should be constitutionally required to notify a client about a particular legal consequence of conviction. It concludes that the pension forfeiture at issue in Abraham meets that test. Part III proposes three non-constitutional reforms to complete Padilla’s unfinished business where the substance of plea agreements is concerned. The goal of these reforms is to minimize the extent to which harsh categorical sanctions destabilize the plea process on which the justice system has come to depend. Using principles set forth in the ABA Criminal Justice Standards, the Article recommends that jurisdictions should 1) compile and disseminate information about collateral sanctions; 2) eliminate those collateral sanctions that are disproportionately severe or bear only a tenuous relationship to the crime; and 3) provide timely and effective ways to avoid or mitigate the sanctions that remain. These reforms will not only shore up the plea system, they will propel a move away from a punitive model of collateral consequences that is frequently self-defeating and unfair to one that can be justified in both moral and utilitarian terms

Gender & Sexuality in the Aba Standards on the Treatment of Prisoners

Over the past three decades, commentators, advocates, and corrections experts have focused increasingly on issues of gender and sexuality in prison. This is due in part to the growing number of women in a generally burgeoning American prison population. It is also attributable to efforts to end custodial sexual abuse and prison sexual violence, which have focused attention on issues relating to women and LGBT prisoners. Also, in part, this heightened attention reflects the influence of growing free-world social movements emphasizing the intersectionality of multiple forms of subordination and seeking to secure fair treatment of gay and transgender people. This Article describes provisions of the recently promulgated American Bar Association Criminal Justice Standards on the Treatment of Prisoners (2010 Standards or Standards) that address issues of gender and sexuality in a correctional setting. Part I describes the road to revision of the ABA standards on prisons and prisoners. Part II deals with the provisions of the 2010 Standards that are particularly relevant to women prisoners, including provisions on screening and classification, pregnant prisoners and new mothers, and co-corrections and equal protection. Part III discusses specific standards that are an outgrowth of the movement to address prison sexual violence, including those dealing with custodial sexual abuse and protection of vulnerable prisoners, as well as cross-gender supervision and privacy. Part III also describes standards affecting lesbian and gay prisoners, and transgender prisoners, reflecting heightened awareness of the special needs of these groups. The Article concludes with a comment on the role of the Bar in establishing correctional policy and practice

Gender & Sexuality in the ABA Standards on the Treatment of Prisoners

Over the past three decades, commentators, advocates, and corrections experts have focused increasingly on issues of gender and sexuality in prison. This is due in part to the growing number of women in a generally burgeoning American prison population. It is also attributable to efforts to end custodial sexual abuse and prison sexual violence, which have focused attention on issues relating to women and LGBT prisoners. Also, in part, this heightened attention reflects the influence of growing free-world social movements emphasizing the intersectionality of multiple forms of subordination and seeking to secure fair treatment of gay and transgender people. This Article describes provisions of the recently promulgated American Bar Association Criminal Justice Standards on the Treatment of Prisoners (2010 Standards or Standards) that address issues of gender and sexuality in a correctional setting. Part I describes the road to revision of the ABA standards on prisons and prisoners. Part II deals with the provisions of the 2010 Standards that are particularly relevant to women prisoners, including provisions on screening and classification, pregnant prisoners and new mothers, and co-corrections and equal protection. Part III discusses specific standards that are an outgrowth of the movement to address prison sexual violence, including those dealing with custodial sexual abuse and protection of vulnerable prisoners, as well as cross-gender supervision and privacy. Part III also describes standards affecting lesbian and gay prisoners, and transgender prisoners, reflecting heightened awareness of the special needs of these groups. The Article concludes with a comment on the role of the Bar in establishing correctional policy and practice