Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Increasing Use Of Challenges To Expert Evidence Under Daubert And Rule 702 In Patent Litigation, Douglas G. Smith
The Increasing Use Of Challenges To Expert Evidence Under Daubert And Rule 702 In Patent Litigation, Douglas G. Smith
Journal of Intellectual Property Law
No abstract provided.
Expert Mining And Required Disclosure, Jonah B. Gelbach
Expert Mining And Required Disclosure, Jonah B. Gelbach
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Why Federal Rule Of Evidence 403 Is Unconstitutional, And Why That Matters, Kenneth S. Klein
Why Federal Rule Of Evidence 403 Is Unconstitutional, And Why That Matters, Kenneth S. Klein
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Following The Rules: Exclusion Of Witness, Sequestration, And No-Consultation Orders, Richard H. Underwood
Following The Rules: Exclusion Of Witness, Sequestration, And No-Consultation Orders, Richard H. Underwood
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
In this Article, Professor Underwood discusses the varying application of Rule 615 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which provides for the exclusion of witnesses. He explains that varying application of Rule 615 and state evidence rules following Rule 615's language creates misunderstandings at trial. Thus, it is important to know not only the federal and local rules but also the "way things are done" in a particular court.
Hudson And Samson: The Roberts Court Confronts Privacy, Dignity, And The Fourth Amendment, John D. Castiglione
Hudson And Samson: The Roberts Court Confronts Privacy, Dignity, And The Fourth Amendment, John D. Castiglione
ExpressO
This article critically analyzes Samson v. California and Hudson v. Michigan, which were the Roberts Court's first major Fourth Amendment decisions. In Samson, the Court upheld a California law allowing government officials to search parolees without any suspicion of wrongdoing. In Hudson, to the surprise of almost every observer, the Court held that knock-and-announce violations do not carry with them a remedy of exclusion. What was most notable about Hudson was not only that it rejected what every state and every federal court, save one, believed to be the proper remedy for knock-and-announce violations, but that it called into question …
Minimizing The Jury Over-Valuation Concern (Visions Of Rationality In Evidence Law Symposium), Richard D. Friedman
Minimizing The Jury Over-Valuation Concern (Visions Of Rationality In Evidence Law Symposium), Richard D. Friedman
Articles
A great deal of the rhetoric of evidence discourse concerns the supposed cognitive inadequacies of the jury. In various contexts we are told that although an item of evidence is probative, it must be excluded because the jury will give it too much weight. I believe this approach has played far too great a role in evidentiary law, and that it is an interesting project to see whether we can construct a satisfactory body of law without relying at all on the cognitive inadequacy argument. I think that, at least to a large extent, we can. In some settings, where …
Expert Testimony, Barry C. Scheck
Constitutional Law - Search And Seizure - Admissibility In A Federal Court Of Evidence Illegally Obtained By State Officers, Robert J. Paley
Constitutional Law - Search And Seizure - Admissibility In A Federal Court Of Evidence Illegally Obtained By State Officers, Robert J. Paley
Michigan Law Review
In response to a call from a citizen whose suspicions had been aroused by the actions of the defendant and a companion, Maryland police unlawfully arrested the companion and searched the premises occupied by him and the defendant. & a result of this search, money was found which had been stolen in the District of Columbia. Although the search was illegal under Maryland law and in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, this money was used as evidence to convict the defendant of housebreaking and larceny in the District of Columbia federal court. On appeal, held, conviction reversed and remanded …
Evidence - Search And Seizure - Standing To Suppress Evidence Obtained By Unconstitutional Search And Seizure, Robert C. Casad S.Ed.
Evidence - Search And Seizure - Standing To Suppress Evidence Obtained By Unconstitutional Search And Seizure, Robert C. Casad S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
The most radical departure of the new California doctrine from federal precedents, however, lies in the rejection of the requirement of "standing" which the federal courts have always imposed. In People v. Martin the California court announced its willingness to permit any criminal defendant to move for the exclusion of evidence obtained by unreasonable search and seizure -regardless of whether it was his premises that were searched or his property that was seized.
Rejection of the requirement of standing by this outstanding court calls for a re-evaluation of the requirement as it is imposed in every other jurisdiction that observes …