Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Criminal Procedure

PDF

University of Washington School of Law

1978

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Proposed Rule Of Evidence 609: Impeachment Of Criminal Defendants By Prior Convictions, D. Joseph Hurson Dec 1978

Proposed Rule Of Evidence 609: Impeachment Of Criminal Defendants By Prior Convictions, D. Joseph Hurson

Washington Law Review

This comment describes current Washington law on the use of criminal convictions to impeach the testimony of criminal defendants and examines the factors which are relevant to the formation of a more acceptable rule. Adoption of the proposed rule would also affect the rules for impeaching nondefendant witnesses. Only a criminal defendant, however, is in jeopardy of actually being convicted as a result of a jury's misuse of evidence of prior convictions. Because the interests of the criminal defendant witness will be so drastically affected by the prior conviction rule which the Washington Supreme Court ultimately adopts, this comment will …


Women's Self-Defense Under Washington Law—State V. Wanrow, 88 Wn. 2d 221, 559 P.2d 548 (1977), Jennifer Marsh Dec 1978

Women's Self-Defense Under Washington Law—State V. Wanrow, 88 Wn. 2d 221, 559 P.2d 548 (1977), Jennifer Marsh

Washington Law Review

The Washington Supreme Court, in State v. Wanrow, examined the issue of self-defense for women under Washington law and held that the application of traditional self-defense rules resulted in prejudicial treatment of women defendants. This note will examine the meaning of the Wanrow decision and offer support for its holding in light of available psychological and sociological data. Additionally, this note will suggest a special analytical framework utilizing social science data to test accepted legal doctrines for latent sex discrimination. The importance of these data in exposing such discrimination will be shown by examining related cases in the area of …


Criminal Procedure—Preservation Of Due Process When Evidence Is Destroyed Or Tested—State V. Wright, 87 Wn. 2d 783, 557 P.2d 1 (1976), Maxine Stansell May 1978

Criminal Procedure—Preservation Of Due Process When Evidence Is Destroyed Or Tested—State V. Wright, 87 Wn. 2d 783, 557 P.2d 1 (1976), Maxine Stansell

Washington Law Review

The purpose of this note is to identify uncertainties in the future application of the Wright rule and to predict their probable resolution. Analysis of Wright and the cases on which it relies leads to the conclusion that failure to use the notice-petition procedure before disposition or testing of evidence will result in sanctions only if the defense can show that evidence destroyed, or chemically changed in testing, was potentially material, and only if the state is unable to show that the failure to preserve was reasonable. In addition, the Wright rule implies a defense right to observe or participate …


Procedural Due Process And The Rules Of Evidence—Federal Impeachment Of The Voucher Rules—Welcome V. Vincent, 549 F.2d 853 (2d Cir.), Cert. Denied, 97 S. Ct. 2960 (1977), Bruce D. Garrison Feb 1978

Procedural Due Process And The Rules Of Evidence—Federal Impeachment Of The Voucher Rules—Welcome V. Vincent, 549 F.2d 853 (2d Cir.), Cert. Denied, 97 S. Ct. 2960 (1977), Bruce D. Garrison

Washington Law Review

Appellant, Ernest Welcome, was convicted in a New York state supreme court on charges of murdering two real estate brokers in their Bronx office. Before indicting Welcome, the State tried another party, Albert Cunningham, for the same offenses. Cunningham had admitted his participation in the crimes to police, giving an accurate account of the date, time, and location of the shootings. After a separate evidentiary hearing, the state court held that his confession to police had been voluntary and thus was admissible against him. Nevertheless, the charges against Cunningham were dropped in mid-trial. At his trial, Welcome called Cunningham as …