NCJ Number
97751
Journal
Brooklyn Law Review Volume: 50 Issue: 2 Dated: (Winter 1984) Pages: 301-338
Date Published
1984
Length
38 pages
Annotation
Using three sets of criteria, this paper analyzes the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982, which authorizes victim impact statements and restitution in Federal cases, and proposes a change in the standard of proof used in the law.
Abstract
Although the victim impact statement and restitution provisions of the law focus mainly on the victim, they also retain procedural protections for the defendant. The statute is constitutional under the fifth, seventh, and eighth amendments. It is constitutional for a judge, rather than a jury, to determine restitutionary issues. The authorization of a monetary sanction with no express maximum, which may also be a condition of probation or parole, does not violate the eighth amendment. However, the standard of proof and assignment of burdens of proof may make the restitutionary provisions ineffective, when taken together with the mandate against prolonged and complicated hearings. The standard of proof and the burden of persuasion should be changed to favor the victim. A total of 217 case notes are supplied.