Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (25)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (15)
- University of Miami Law School (8)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (7)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (7)
-
- Seattle University School of Law (5)
- University of Kentucky (5)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (5)
- Campbell University School of Law (4)
- Cleveland State University (4)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (4)
- Fordham Law School (3)
- Pepperdine University (3)
- The University of Akron (3)
- University of Washington School of Law (3)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (2)
- University of Baltimore Law (2)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (2)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (2)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (1)
- St. Mary's University (1)
- University of Missouri School of Law (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (1)
- University of South Carolina (1)
- West Virginia University (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (18)
- Touro Law Review (15)
- University of Miami Law Review (8)
- Cardozo Law Review (7)
- Indiana Law Journal (7)
-
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (6)
- Kentucky Law Journal (5)
- Seattle University Law Review (5)
- Campbell Law Review (4)
- Cleveland State Law Review (4)
- Villanova Law Review (4)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (4)
- Akron Law Review (3)
- Washington Law Review (3)
- Fordham Law Review (2)
- Maryland Law Review (2)
- Pepperdine Law Review (2)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (2)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (2)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (1)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (1)
- Fordham Urban Law Journal (1)
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (1)
- NYLS Law Review (1)
- Nevada Law Journal (1)
- Oklahoma Law Review (1)
- South Carolina Law Review (1)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (1)
- University of Baltimore Law Forum (1)
- University of Baltimore Law Review (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 118
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Dignitary Confrontation Clause, Erin Sheley
The Dignitary Confrontation Clause, Erin Sheley
Washington Law Review
For seventeen years, the Supreme Court’s Confrontation Clause jurisprudence has been confused and confusing. In Crawford v. Washington (2004), the Court overruled prior precedent and held that “testimonial” out-of-court statements could not be admitted at trial unless the defendant had an opportunity to cross-examine the declarant, even when the statement would be otherwise admissible as particularly reliable under an exception to the rule against hearsay. In a series of contradictory opinions over the next several years, the Court proceeded to expand and then seemingly roll back this holding, leading to widespread chaos in common types of cases, particularly those involving …
Assertion And Hearsay, Richard Lloret
Assertion And Hearsay, Richard Lloret
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
This article explores the characteristics and functions of assertion and considers how the term influences the definition of hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801. Rule 801(a) defines hearsay by limiting it to words and conduct intended as an assertion, but the rule does not define the term assertion. Courts and legal scholars have focused relatively little attention on the nature and definition of assertion. That is unfortunate, because assertion is a robust concept that has been the subject of intense philosophic study over recent decades. Assertion is not a mere cypher standing in for whatever speech or conduct one …
Why Do We Admit Criminal Confessions Into Evidence?, David Crump
Why Do We Admit Criminal Confessions Into Evidence?, David Crump
Seattle University Law Review
There is an enormous literature about the admissibility of criminal confessions. But almost all of it deals with issues related to self-incrimination or, to a lesser extent, with hearsay or accuracy concerns. As a result, the question whether we ever admit criminal confessions into evidence has not been the subject of much analysis. This gap is odd, since confessions are implicitly disfavored by a proportion of the literature and they often collide with exclusionary doctrines. Furthermore, the self-incrimination issue sometimes is resolved by balancing, and it would help if we knew what we were balancing. Therefore, one might ask: Why …
Can You Hear Me Now: The Impacts Of Prosecutorial Call Monitoring On Defendants' Access To Justice, Hope L. Demer
Can You Hear Me Now: The Impacts Of Prosecutorial Call Monitoring On Defendants' Access To Justice, Hope L. Demer
South Carolina Law Review
No abstract provided.
Hearsay In The Smiley Face: Analyzing The Use Of Emojis As Evidence, Erin Janssen
Hearsay In The Smiley Face: Analyzing The Use Of Emojis As Evidence, Erin Janssen
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract forthcoming
Hearsay And Abuse: Where Past Is Present, The Hon. Andrea M. Leahy, Jared A. Mclain Esq.
Hearsay And Abuse: Where Past Is Present, The Hon. Andrea M. Leahy, Jared A. Mclain Esq.
University of Baltimore Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Excited Utterance Paradox, Steven Baicker-Mckee
The Excited Utterance Paradox, Steven Baicker-Mckee
Seattle University Law Review
Based on nothing more than John Henry Wigmore’s personal belief that a witness under the throes of excitement is unable to fabricate an untruthful statement, the excited utterance exception allows parties to present out-of-court statements to the jury or judge without any of the safeguards the judicial system uses to promote honest and accurate testimony. This Article collects and examines much of the scientific evidence bearing on Wigmore’s premise and identifies two paradoxical conclusions that undermine the exception. First, the premise itself is unfounded; science absolutely does not support the notion that a witness is incapable of lying while emotionally …
The Cost Of Ab 193: Constitutional Guarantees Sacrificed For Ineffective Means, Paul George
The Cost Of Ab 193: Constitutional Guarantees Sacrificed For Ineffective Means, Paul George
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Billy Joel: The Minstrel Testifies Or How The Rules Of Evidence Handcuff The Piano Man, Hon. Richard A. Dollinger
Billy Joel: The Minstrel Testifies Or How The Rules Of Evidence Handcuff The Piano Man, Hon. Richard A. Dollinger
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Face-To-Face With Facial Recognition Evidence: Admissibility Under The Post-Crawford Confrontation Clause, Joseph Clarke Celentino
Face-To-Face With Facial Recognition Evidence: Admissibility Under The Post-Crawford Confrontation Clause, Joseph Clarke Celentino
Michigan Law Review
In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court announced a major change in Confrontation Clause doctrine, abandoning a decades-old framework that focused on the common law principles of hearsay analysis: necessity and reliability. The new doctrine, grounded in an originalist interpretation of the Sixth Amendment, requires courts to determine whether a particular statement is testimonial. But the Court has struggled to present a coherent definition of the term testimonial. In its subsequent decisions, the Court illustrated that its new Confrontation Clause doctrine could be used to bar forensic evidence, including laboratory test results, if the government failed to produce the …
The Changing Face Of The Rule Against Hearsay In English Law, R. A. Clark
The Changing Face Of The Rule Against Hearsay In English Law, R. A. Clark
Akron Law Review
The rule against hearsay has always been surrounded by an aura of mystery and has been treated with excessive reverence by many English judges. Traditionally the English courts have been reluctant to allow any development in the exceptions to this exclusionary rule, regarding hearsay evidence as being so dangerous that even where it appears to be of a high probative calibre it should be excluded at all costs. But recent developments, both statutory and common law, have demonstrated a much more relaxed approach to this rule. In civil cases the hearsay rule has been contained in statutory form for some …
Lilly V. Virginia: Silencing The "Firmly Rooted" Hearsay Exception With Regard To An Accomplice's Testimony And Its Rejuvenation Of The Confrontation Clause, Leslie Morsek
Akron Law Review
This Note examines the impact on the confrontation clause of introducing an accomplice's custodial statements which inculpate a defendant. Part II delves into the background of this issue by examining the confrontation clause's origin, the significance of hearsay with respect to the confrontation clause, and important cases in this area. Part III provides a statement of the facts, the procedural history, and the United States Supreme Court's decision in Lilly. Finally, Part IV analyzes the Lilly decision and its rejuvenation of the confrontation clause.
Back To The Future: Lorraine V. Markel American Insurance Co. And New Findings On The Admissibility Of Electronically Stored Information, Hon. Paul W. Grimm, Michael V. Ziccardi Esq., Alexander W. Major Esq.
Back To The Future: Lorraine V. Markel American Insurance Co. And New Findings On The Admissibility Of Electronically Stored Information, Hon. Paul W. Grimm, Michael V. Ziccardi Esq., Alexander W. Major Esq.
Akron Law Review
Imagine the following hypothetical, patterned on an actual case pending in federal court, and you can begin to appreciate why there is a growing awareness of the need to have clear analytical thinking regarding the admissibility of electronically stored information, variously referred to as “ESI,” “digital,” “electronic,” “computer generated,” or “computer stored” evidence in state and federal courts. ConsumerPro is a corporation that provides installment credit to consumers with poor or un-established credit records to enable them to purchase on credit expensive electronic and computer products like flat screen televisions, computers, and entertainment systems. Under their business plan, a purchaser …
Recent Development: Hailes V. State: The State May Appeal A Trial Court's Ruling Excluding A Dying Declaration; The Length Of Time Between A Declarant's Statement And Death Is Irrelevant In A Dying Declaration Analysis; The Confrontation Clause Is Inapplicable To Dying Declarations, Lauren A. Panfile
University of Baltimore Law Forum
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the State may appeal a trial court’s suppression of a victim’s dying declaration based on the legislative intent of Section 12-302(c)(4)(i) of the Maryland Code, Courts and Judicial Procedure Article (“section 12-302(c)(4)(i)”). Hailes v. State, 442 Md. 488, 497-98, 113 A.3d 608, 613-14 (2015). The court further held that a victim’s statement, made while on life support, was a dying declaration regardless of the fact that the victim died two years after making the statement. Id. at 506, 113 A.3d at 618. Finally, the court held that the Confrontation Clause of the …
The Case For Ehearsay, Jeffrey Bellin
Memorandum: Hearsay Exception For Electronic Communications Of Recent Perception, Daniel J. Capra
Memorandum: Hearsay Exception For Electronic Communications Of Recent Perception, Daniel J. Capra
Fordham Law Review
No abstract provided.
Contents May Have Shifted: Disentangling The Best Evidence Rule From The Rule Against Hearsay, Colin Miller
Contents May Have Shifted: Disentangling The Best Evidence Rule From The Rule Against Hearsay, Colin Miller
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
The rule against hearsay covers a statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted but does not cover a statement offered for another purpose. Meanwhile, the Best Evidence Rule states that a party seeking to prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph must produce the original or account for its nonproduction. Does this mean that the Rule is inapplicable when a party seeks to prove something other than the truth of the matter asserted in a writing, recording or photograph? Most courts have answered this question in the affirmative. This essay argues these courts are wrong.
Supreme Court, New York County, People V. Vasquez, Jessica Goodwin
Supreme Court, New York County, People V. Vasquez, Jessica Goodwin
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Paul, Adam D'Antonio
Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Paul, Adam D'Antonio
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Appellate Division, First Department, People V. Bradley, Kathleen Egan
Appellate Division, First Department, People V. Bradley, Kathleen Egan
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Conflicting Confrontation Clause Concerns: The Admissibility Of Hospital Records Versus A Defendant's Right To Confrontation, Susan Barlow
Conflicting Confrontation Clause Concerns: The Admissibility Of Hospital Records Versus A Defendant's Right To Confrontation, Susan Barlow
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Admissibility Of Cell Site Location Information In Washington Courts, Ryan W. Dumm
The Admissibility Of Cell Site Location Information In Washington Courts, Ryan W. Dumm
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment principally explores when and how a party can successfully admit cell cite location information into evidence. Beginning with the threshold inquiry of relevance, Part III examines when cell site location information is relevant and in what circumstances the information, though relevant, could be unfairly prejudicial, cumulative, or confusing. Part IV provides the bulk of the analysis, which centers on the substantive foundation necessary to establish the information’s credibility and authenticity. Part V looks at three ancillary issues: hearsay, a criminal defendant’s Sixth Amendment confrontation rights, and the introduction of a summary of voluminous records. Finally, Part VI offers …
People V. Rojas: The Expanding Concept Of Unavailability, Brian Wade Uhl
People V. Rojas: The Expanding Concept Of Unavailability, Brian Wade Uhl
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Two Notes On Evidence: Privileges And Hearsay, J. W. Deese
Two Notes On Evidence: Privileges And Hearsay, J. W. Deese
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Someone Call 911, Crawford Is Dying - People V. Duhs, Caroline Knoepffler
Someone Call 911, Crawford Is Dying - People V. Duhs, Caroline Knoepffler
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Testimonial Statements: The Death Of Dying Declarations? - People V. Clay, Sarah R. Gitomer
Testimonial Statements: The Death Of Dying Declarations? - People V. Clay, Sarah R. Gitomer
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Silencing The Victims In Child Sexual Abuse Prosecutions: The Confrontation Clause And Children's Hearsay Statements Before And After Michigan V. Bryant, Deborah Paruch
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Accomplice Confessions And The Confrontation Clause: Crawford V. Washington Confronts Past Issues With A New Rule, Kjirstin Graham
Accomplice Confessions And The Confrontation Clause: Crawford V. Washington Confronts Past Issues With A New Rule, Kjirstin Graham
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Garner V. State: Maryland’S Implied Retreat From Implied Assertions, Lindsey N. Lanzendorfer
Garner V. State: Maryland’S Implied Retreat From Implied Assertions, Lindsey N. Lanzendorfer
Maryland Law Review
No abstract provided.
Melendez-Diaz And The Right To Confrontation, Craig M. Bradley
Melendez-Diaz And The Right To Confrontation, Craig M. Bradley
Chicago-Kent Law Review
In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court overruled Ohio v. Roberts and adopted new law concerning the use of hearsay testimony at criminal trials. This was based on the Sixth Amendment's command that "In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him .. " On its face this provision seems to say that the accused has the right to cross-examine anybody who testifies for the prosecution at trial, whether as a live witness or through hearsay. The Supreme Court acknowledged much of this in Crawford, but …