Crime Victim Litigation Clinic

Under the supervision of Executive Director Meg Garvin, and the lawyers of the National Crime Victim Law Institute (NCVLI), students support crime victim attorneys nationwide through legal research and writing that is used in a variety of ways, including: to support lawyers nationwide who are directly representing crime victims in criminal cases; to help NCVLI write amicus curiae briefs that are filed in trial and appellate courts nationwide; to help NCVLI anticipate and prepare for future litigation at both the trial and appellate levels; and to contribute to NCVLI’s library and brief bank on victims’ rights issues, which advances the law for sexual violence survivors through litigation, legislation, and policy work.

The Clinic is open to all law students after their first year is complete. Preference is given to students in their last year. This is a three-credit course, with grading on a pass/fail basis. Students are expected to commit approximately 4-5 hours of work per week outside of class time plus a minimum 30-minute mandatory weekly meeting with individual supervising attorney. Each semester the class will meet for two hours weekly at an assigned time. The number of students participating is restricted to 6.

People v. Superior Court, --- P.3d. ---, 2007 WL 2852596 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 3, 2007). Defendant, who was driving under the influence of alcohol, crossed the center line of a highway and hit two people riding an oncoming motorcycle. One victim was killed and the other seriously injured. Defendant was convicted of vehicular manslaughter and driving under the influence with bodily injury. Following a lengthy sentencing hearing, at which the victim addressed the court, defendant was denied probation and sentenced to two years in prison. Shortly thereafter, the sentencing judge recalled the matter and ordered defendant returned from prison for a re-sentencing at which the judge intended to place defendant on probation. At the re-sentencing, the court did not allow the victim to address the court, and released defendant, sentencing her to probation. On appeal, a split court held the lower court did not violate the victim’s right to be heard at sentencing because it had allowed victims to “reasonably express” their views at the initial sentencing. NCVLI will file an amicus brief with the California State Supreme Court, arguing that the trial court violated the victim’s state constitutional right to be heard at sentencing. Law students Daniel Pachico and Mike Johnson are working on this case.

State v. WBAL, No. 1938, appeal docketed (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Oct. 24, 2007). Defendant was convicted of First Degree Premeditated Murder and First Degree Premeditated Rape. During the criminal investigation, the police recorded video- and audio-taped confessions in which the defendant graphically depicted his crimes. At trial, these recordings were played in open court with the media and the victim’s parents present; the victim’s young child was intentionally not present and has been continuously shielded from the graphic information ever since. At the conclusion of trial, a TV station intervened in the case to obtain copies of the tapes. The court granted the intervention. The state has appealed, and the victim’s daughter and other surviving family members are participating in the appeal. NCVLI will participate as amicus, working to protect the victims’ rights to respect, dignity, courtesy, and sensitivity afforded by the Maryland Constitution. Law School Students Katie Carson and Melanie Kebler are working on this case.

State of Utah v Worthen, --- P.3d ----, 2008 WL 215275 (Utah Ct. App. 2008). In the trial court, defendant moved the court for an in camera review of the minor victim’s counseling records from three separate locations where she received counseling both prior to and after her report of sexual abuse. The state opposed the request, arguing that the records were privileged under Utah’s therapist/patient privilege, and that the defendant’s request was insufficient to pierce such privilege. The trial court ruled in defendant’s favor, holding that he had made a sufficiently specific showing to require a review to determine if evidence existed in the records that related to the victim’s motive to lie. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court, and the state petitioned for a writ of certiorari from the Utah Supreme Court. NCVLI will submit an amicus curiae brief in the Utah Supreme Court, arguing that the victim’s rights to privacy, protection, and fairness, coupled with the importance of maintaining the confidentiality of victims’ counseling records, requires reversal. Law School Students Ben Lull and Beth Jarvis are working on this case.