Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Bullshit!: Why The Retroactive Application Of Federal Rules Of Evidence 413-414 And State Counterparts Violates The Ex Post Facto Clause, Colin Miller
Faculty Publications
In Calder v. Bull, the Supreme Court recognized four types of laws that cannot be applied retroactively consistent with the Ex Post Facto Clause, including “[e]very law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offence, in order to convict the offender.” But, in its opinion in Carmell v. Texas, the Court determined that ordinary rules of evidence do not violate the Clause because they (1) are “evenhanded, in the sense that they may benefit either the State or the defendant in a …
No Expertise Required: How Washington D.C. Has Erred In Expanding Its Expert Testimony Requirement, Colin Miller
No Expertise Required: How Washington D.C. Has Erred In Expanding Its Expert Testimony Requirement, Colin Miller
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.