Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
Counsel's Control Over The Presentation Of Mitigating Evidence During Capital Sentencing, James Michael Blakemore
Counsel's Control Over The Presentation Of Mitigating Evidence During Capital Sentencing, James Michael Blakemore
Michigan Law Review
The Sixth Amendment gives a defendant the right to control his defense and the right to a lawyer's assistance. A lawyer's assistance, however, sometimes interferes with a defendant's control over his case. As a result, the Supreme Court, over time, has had to delineate the spheres of authority that pertain to counsel and defendant respectively. The Court has not yet decisively assigned control over mitigating evidence to either counsel or defendant. This Note argues that counsel should control the presentation of mitigating evidence during capital sentencing. First, and most importantly, decisions concerning the presentation of mitigating evidence are best characterized …
Eyes Wide Shut: How Ignorance Of The Common Interest Doctrine Can Compromise Informed Consent, Katharine Traylor Schaffzin
Eyes Wide Shut: How Ignorance Of The Common Interest Doctrine Can Compromise Informed Consent, Katharine Traylor Schaffzin
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Article addresses the novel ethical problems presented by the common interest doctrine that implicate an attorney's duties of diligence, confidentiality, and loyalty to his or her client. These adverse effects of informal aggregation are not always fully considered before engaging a client in a common interest arrangement, but they should be. In Part II, this Article first explains the potential advantages that the common interest doctrine presents as an evidentiary tool, but then recognizes that exercise of the doctrine creates an undefined duty on the part of the attorney to the party with whom a client exchanges confidential information. …
Some Steps Between Attitudes And Verdicts, Phoebe C. Ellsworth
Some Steps Between Attitudes And Verdicts, Phoebe C. Ellsworth
Book Chapters
Most research that has attempted to predict verdict preferences on the basis of stable juror characteristics, such as attitudes and personality traits, has found that individual differences among jurors are not very useful predictors, accounting for only a small proportion of the variance in verdict choices. Some commentators have therefore concluded that verdicts are overwhelmingly accounted for by "the weight of the evidence," and that differences among jurors have negligible effects. But there is a paradox here: In most cases the weight of the evidence is insufficient to produce firstballot unanimity in the jury (Hans & Vidmar, 1986; Hastie, Penrod, …
The Perils Of Privilege: Waiver And The Litigator, Richard L. Marcus
The Perils Of Privilege: Waiver And The Litigator, Richard L. Marcus
Michigan Law Review
Waiver can be made less tricky, although it will never yield algebraic accuracy. Focusing on civil litigation, this article develops a framework for waiver decisions. It begins by stressing a factor that others have neglected - the costs generated by broad traditional waiver rules. These costs result largely from changes in lawyer behavior to reduce waiver risks. Thus, enormous energy can be expended to guarantee that privileged materials are not inadvertently revealed in discovery, and lawyers may adopt elaborate witness preparation strategies in order to prevent witnesses from seeing privileged materials. Judges also feel the burden; where waiver is at …
Evidence Problems In Criminal Cases, John W. Reed
Evidence Problems In Criminal Cases, John W. Reed
Book Chapters
The Federal Rules of Evidence, enacted by Congress, became effective on July 1, 1975. Ten states have adopted state versions of the Federal Rules to govern trials in their courts, and about half the remaining states are considering whether to follow suit. Michigan is one of these latter states. Early in 1977 a committee appointed by the Supreme Court of Michigan proposed rules of evidence for Michigan closely patterned on the Federal Rules, and, if all goes well, the Court will promulgate rules for the Michigan courts to become effective in 1977 or soon thereafter. Michigan lawyers should be aware …
The Future Of Evidence Law: Or, Some Prophecies About Proof, John W. Reed
The Future Of Evidence Law: Or, Some Prophecies About Proof, John W. Reed
Other Publications
I am honored to participate in this seminar that is part of the celebration surrounding the dedication of Colorado's new State Judicial Building. But that feeling of honor is tempered by an awareness of the responsibility and perils of the role I have been asked to play. With the assignment, "The Future of Evidence Law," I have been asked to play the prophet, to be a seer of sorts, and to suggest what rules and principles will govern proof at trials at some date in the future. Exactly what date was not specified in the invitation-a decade, perhaps? A generation? …
Evidence--Privileged Communications--The Attorney-Client Privilege In The Corporate Setting: A Suggested Approach, Michigan Law Review
Evidence--Privileged Communications--The Attorney-Client Privilege In The Corporate Setting: A Suggested Approach, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note will first review the development of the personal attorney-client privilege and the extent to which the term "client" has been expanded for use with that privilege. Then, the development of the corporate attorney-client privilege will be examined with an eye toward isolating the tests that the courts have used to define the extent of the term "client." Finally, with the results of these examinations in mind, an approach will be suggested that, if adopted by the courts, could effectively eliminate the confusion that presently exists with regard to the scope of the attorney-client privilege in the corporate setting.
What Is This Thing Called Hearsay?, John W. Reed
What Is This Thing Called Hearsay?, John W. Reed
Articles
This article is based on an address delivered at the 1956 Advocacy Institute at the University of Michigan. A re-examination of elementary principles, the discussion proceeds on the express assumption that much of the uncertainty and confusion in usa of the hearsay rule is unnecessary because it is due to failure to recall and employ these principles.
Privileged Communication Between Attorney And Client-Question Of Whether The Relation Exists Left To Jury-Party Allowed To Assign Error On Ruling Violating The Privilege, Victor H. Lane
Articles
This procedure was justified in the opinion in State v. Snook (Court of Errors and "Appeals of N. J., 1920), 109 Atl. 289. Snook was on trial for manslaughter charged as having been committed by the reckless driving of an automobile. After the act, Mimmick, one of the persons in the automobile, and afterward a witness for the defense, went to an attorney and had some conversation with him, the substance of which, as testified to by the attorney, was a recital by M. of what had occurred and an inquiry by him of the attorney as to what he …