Law Commons^™

Comments: Because Sex Crimes Are Different: Why Maryland Should (Carefully) Adopt The Contested Federal Rules Of Evidence 413 And 414 That Permit Propensity Evidence Of A Criminal Defendant's Other Sex Offenses, Joyce R. Lombardi

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

Expert Testimony And Scientific Evidence, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

Handout from a day-long lecture on expert and scientific testimony at the Maryland Judicial Institute.

Impeachment Of Witnesses: A Walking Tour, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This handout from the Maryland State's Attorneys' Convention in 2003 summarizes the general methods of witness impeachment, who may be impeached, and impeachments by attacks on witnesses' character for truthfulness.

"Quick-Takes" On A Few Recent Decisions In Evidence Law ... And Rule 5-407, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

Handout from the State and Local Government Law Institute covering recent (2003) Maryland evidence cases.

An Introduction To The Rules Of Evidence Applicable To Collection Cases In Maryland Trial Courts, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This class handout introduces students to the basic concepts of evidence using examples and language from the Maryland Rules of Evidence.

Dealing With Complex Evidence Of Domestic Violence: A Primer For The Civil Bench, Jane C. Murphy, Jane H. Aiken

All Faculty Scholarship

New laws and policies aimed at protecting victims of domestic violence have been adopted across the country throughout the last twenty years. The legal approaches taken to protect battered women and control family violence have brought about significant changes in family law. New laws include statutes permitting civil protection or restraining orders, and laws requiring that domestic violence be considered in custody and visitation decisions. Both of these types of statutory reforms can provide protection to adult victims of domestic violence and their children. Evaluating a parent’s fitness by considering past acts of violence to other family members results in …

Comments: Taking Remedial Measures To Amend Maryland Rule Of Evidence 5-407 To Explicitly Apply To Products Liability Actions, Jaime A. Walker

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

Evidentiary Considerations In Civil Cases, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

Handout from a presentation at the Maryland Judicial Institute outlining character evidence and providing the text of the applicable Rules.

Evidence Issues In Domestic Violence Civil Cases, Jane C. Murphy, Jane H. Aiken

All Faculty Scholarship

New laws and policies aimed at protecting victims of domestic violence have been adopted across the country over the last twenty years.The legal approaches taken to protect battered women and control family violence have resulted in significant changes in family law. New laws include statutes permitting civil protection or restraining orders, and laws requiring that domestic violence be considered in custody and/or visitation decisions. Both of these types of statutory reforms can provide protection to adult victims of domestic violence and their children. Evaluating a parent's fitness by considering past acts of violence to other family members results in decisions …

The Use And Effectiveness Of Various Learning Materials In An Evidence Class, Stephen J. Shapiro

All Faculty Scholarship

Like many law teachers, I take reasonable care in selecting the outside materials I require my students to use (or recommend to them) in preparing for class and studying for the exam. I base my choice on my own notions of what would be most helpful to them in learning the material, preparing for class, succeeding on the exam, and preparing to be lawyers. I carefully weigh such matters as length of assignment, interest to the students, and active versus passive learning.

My assessment, however, is based almost entirely on my own notions of what the students will find most …

New Federal Rules In Sex Offense Cases, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This article from the November/December 1995 issue of the Maryland Bar Journal details the changes made to the Federal Rules of Evidence following the enactment of the 1994 Comprehensive Crime Bill. Questions raised by the new rules and the response of the Judicial Conference are also discussed.

No Magic Formula: A New Approach For Calculating The Ten Year Time Period For Admission Of Prior Conviction Evidence, Amy E. Sloan

All Faculty Scholarship

Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 609 governs admission of prior conviction evidence. Under this rule, it is easier to admit evidence of a prior conviction that is less than ten years old than to admit evidence of older convictions. The ten year period is measured from the later of either the date of conviction or the date of release from confinement.

Calculating the ten year period is fairly straightforward in most cases but becomes confusing when the witness has been confined for violating the terms of probation, parole, or some other period of conditional release. Does the confinement for violation …

Maryland's Adoption Of A Code Of Evidence, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This short paper written just after the adoption of the Maryland Rules of Evidence explains the rules and the process it took to adapt the Federal Rules of Evidence for use in Maryland.

Maryland's First Evidence Code, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This outline from a talk given by Professor McLain outlines the history of the rules of evidence Maryland has used and provides a quick summary of the then-new Title 5, the Maryland Rules of Evidence.

Notes: Admissibility Of An Out-Of-Court Confession: Inability To Make An In-Court Identification Of The Defendant As The Out-Of-Court Confessor, Despite Exactness Of Names And Other Circumstantial Evidence Of Identity, Goes To The Admissibility Rather Than To The Weight Of The Confession. Woodson V. State, 325 Md. 251, 600 A.2d 420 (1992), Roberta C. Sinopole

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

Notes: Criminal Law — Evidence — Evidence Of Refusal To Submit To Chemical Breath Test For Alcohol Admissible Only When Relevant To Matters Other Than Defendant's Innocence Or Guilt. Krauss V. State, 322 Md. 376, 587 A.2d 1102 (1991), Howard S. Cohen

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

Challenging Public Investigative Reports: How To Fight The Hearsay Exception, Steven P. Grossman, Stephen J. Shapiro

All Faculty Scholarship

This paper discusses how attorneys can argue against having government and public reports admitted into evidence at trial that would be damaging to their client. When this paper was done, such reports were admitted via Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8)(C). The authors argue that it is possible to challenge admission of factual findings in public reports despite various court decisions which make this difficult.

Hearsay In State Administrative Hearings: The Maryland Experience And Suggestions For Change, Arnold Rochvarg

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Admission Of Government Fact Findings Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 803(8)(C): Limiting The Dangers Of Unreliable Hearsay, Steven P. Grossman, Stephen J. Shapiro

All Faculty Scholarship

Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8)(C), an exception to the rule against admission of hearsay, permits introduction of public records or reports containing the fact findings of the reporter without requiring the reporter to appear at trial. These fact findings can be based upon the reporter's own observations and calculations or information imparted to the reporter from sources having no connection to any public agency whatsoever. Rule 803(8)(C) has also been used as the vehicle for presenting juries with fact findings from hearings conducted by public officials. The rule would seem to allow these fact findings even though the opponent had …

The Doctrine Of Inevitable Discovery: A Plea For Reasonable Limitations, Steven P. Grossman

All Faculty Scholarship

In reinstating the Iowa murder conviction of Robert Williams, the Supreme Court accepted explicitly for the first time the doctrine of inevitable discovery. Applied for some time by state and federal courts, the doctrine of inevitable discovery is a means by which evidence obtained illegally can still be admitted against defendants in criminal cases. Unfortunately, the Court chose to adopt the doctrine without any of the safeguards necessary to insure that the deterrent impact of the exclusionary rule would be preserved, and in a form that is subject to and almost invites abuse.

This article warns of the danger to …

Casenotes: Evidence — Maryland Adopts The Present Sense Impression Exception To The Hearsay Rule. Booth V. State, 306 Md. 313, 508 A.2d 976 (1986), Jonathan Z. May

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

Casenotes Criminal Law — Evidence — Expert Testimony That Rape Victim Suffered Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Is Admissible To Rebut A Defense Of Consent. State V. Allewalt, 308 Md. 89, 517 A.2d 741 (1986), Robert C. Sanders

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

Casenotes: New Trials — Juror Misconduct — Evidence — Where Motion For New Trial Is Based On Jury's Exposure To Extraneous Matter During Deliberations, Movant Must Show Probable Prejudice — Jurors' Affidavits Are Incompetent Evidence. Wernsing V. General Motors Corp., 298 Md. 406, 470 A.2d 802 (1984), Laurell Kalvan

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

Casenotes: Evidence — Use Of Prior Bad Acts Not Resulting In Conviction Are Permissible For Impeachment Purposes If Probative Of Veracity And Readily Provable. State V. Cox, 298 Md. 173, 468 A.2d 319 (1983), John Jude Hathway

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

Comments And Casenotes: To Kill A Mockingbird - Star Decisis And M'Naghten In Maryland, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

There are certain pillars of jurisprudence which, despite the erosive elements of time and progress, remain sacred. After more than a century of judicial dialogue the venerable M'Naghten Rule survives as the prevailing test to determine criminal responsibility. The rule states: "To establish a defense on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or if he did know …