Law Commons^™

When Do Facts Persuade? Some Thoughts On The Market For “Empirical Legal Studies”, Elizabeth Chambliss

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Tainted Provenance: When, If Ever, Should Torture Evidence Be Admissible, Michael P. Scharf

Faculty Publications

Written by a consultant to the United Nation's newly established Cambodia Genocide Tribunal, "Tainted Provenance" examines one of the most important legal questions that will face the Tribunal as it begins its trials next year -- whether evidence of the Khmer Rouge command structure that came from interrogation sessions at the infamous Tuol Sleng torture facility should be considered notwithstanding the international exclusionary rule for evidence procured by torture. The issue of whether there should be exceptions to the torture evidence exclusionary rule (and how those exceptions should be crafted to avoid abuse) has significant implications beyond the international tribunal, …

Pretrial Discovery Of Expert Testimony, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Nontestimonial Identification Orders For Dna Testing, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Seizures Without Searches: Defining Property Seizures And Developing A Property Seizure Model, Eric R. Carpenter

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Prosecutors, Ethics, And Expert Witnesses, Paul C. Giannelli, Kevin C. Mcmunigal

Faculty Publications

Commentators who have examined the DNA exonerations have noted the disturbing role that prosecutors have played in these wrongful convictions. Another significant contributor to these miscarriages of justice is the misuse of expert testimony, a third of the cases according to some sources. This Article examines the intersection of these two factors - the prosecutor's role in using and presenting expert testimony.

Prosecutorial misconduct may occur during most stages of a trial, beginning with the selection of witnesses, including the improper "shopping" for experts. Additional abuses occur when prosecutors fail to abide by rules governing the pretrial disclosure of scientific …

Brady And Jailhouse Snitches, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Bite Mark Analysis, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

Courts have admitted bite mark comparison evidence in homicide, rape, and child abuse cases. By the 1980s, the technique had gained widespread judicial acceptance. Hundreds of cases have admitted this type of evidence, and no reported case has rejected it. Moreover, some courts speak of bite mark comparison as a "science." Indeed, its acceptance is so well-established that several courts have taken judicial notice of its reliability, implying that the validity of the technique is not subject to reasonable dispute.

Yet, the scientific foundations for bite mark comparisons has never been demonstrated. Such basic issues as the uniqueness of the …

Daubert Challenges To Firearms (“Ballistics”) Identifications, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

It's Not Just About Miranda: Determining The Voluntariness Of Confessions In Criminal Prosecutions, Paul Marcus

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

What Do Snowmobiles, Mercury Emissions, Greenhouse Gases, And Runoff Have In Common?: The Controversy Over "Junk Science", Linda A. Malone

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Wrongful Convictions And Forensic Science: The Need To Regulate Crime Labs, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

DNA testing has exonerated over 200 convicts, some of whom were on death row. Studies show that a substantial number of these miscarriages of justice involved scientific fraud or junk science. This article documents the failures of crime labs and some forensic techniques, such as microscopic hair comparison and bullet lead analysis. Some cases involved incompetence and sloppy procedures, while others entailed deceit, but the extent of the derelictions - the number of episodes and the duration of some of the abuses, covering decades in several instances - demonstrates that the problems are systemic.

Paradoxically, the most scientifically sound procedure …

Confidentiality In Arbitration: Beyond The Myth, Richard C. Reuben

Faculty Publications

Many people assume that arbitration is private and confidential. But is that assumption accurate? This article is the first to explore that question in the important context of whether arbitration communications can be discovered and admitted into evidence in other legal proceedings - a question that is just beginning to show up in the cases. It first surveys the federal and state statutory and case law, finding that arbitration communications in fact are generally discoverable and admissible. It then considers the normative desirability of discovering and admitting arbitration communications evidence, concluding that the free discovery and admissibility of arbitration communications …

Using Graphics To Teach Evidence, Kevin C. Mcmunigal

Faculty Publications

As an Assistant United States Attorney in the general crimes unit of a metropolitan United States Attorney's Office, I regularly tried a variety of cases ranging from bank robberies and drug offenses to white collar crimes. Regardless of the type of crime, I frequently found various types of graphics useful in presenting the case. Examples included a chart providing a point by point comparison of modus operandi in two armed bank robberies and a map of the scene of a controlled purchase of cocaine showing the locations and movements of multiple defendants, an informant, and federal agents. Such graphics helped …

Daubert Challenges To Fingerprints, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Faith-Based Miranda: Why The New Missouri V. Seibert Police Bad Faith Test Is A Terrible Idea, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Strategies For Challenging Police Drug Jargon Testimony, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Like Migratory Birds- Latin American Claimants In U.S. Courts And The Ford-Firestone Rollover Litigation, Manuel A. Gómez

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

What Happens When Dirty Harry Becomes An [Expert] Witness For The Prosecution?, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Ake V. Oklahoma: The Right To Expert Assistance In A Post-Daubert, Post-Dna World, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

Although securing the services of defense experts to examine evidence, to advise counsel, and to testify at trial is frequently critical in modern criminal litigation, it was not until 1985 that the United States Supreme Court in Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68 (1985), recognized, for the first time, a constitutional right to expert assistance. In a system in which an overwhelming majority of criminal defendants are indigent, Ake was a landmark case. Nevertheless, the Ake Court could not have anticipated how the advent of DNA evidence would revolutionize forensic science or how the Daubert trilogy would alter the judicial …

Forfeiture By Wrongdoing And Those Who Acquiesce In Witness Intimidation: A Reach Exceeding Its Grasp And Other Problems With Federal Rule Of Evidence 804(B)(6), James F. Flanagan

Faculty Publications

This article is the first comprehensive and critical analysis of the new exception to the hearsay rule that permits prosecutors to admit hearsay statements of absent witnesses when the defendant causes their unavailability at trial. The article develops the problems with the rule's overbroad language, its potential to admit unreliable hearsay and its relationship to the Confrontation Clause. These issues are of increasing interest to lawyers, judges and justices now that it is a federal rule and been adopted by ten states.

The first section is a comprehensive statement of the rule as now applied. The exception is traced from …

Reliability And The Admissibility Of Experts, Dale A. Nance

Faculty Publications

Modern law on expert testimony insists, as a condition of admissibility, that the asserted expertise be determined by the trial judge to be reliable. Reliability is usually characterized as a dichotomous attribute of evidence, as if expertise were either reliable or unreliable. This article argues that making progress in the development of meaningful and appropriate restrictions on the admissibility of expert testimony requires that we abandon this conceptualization and understand the implications of endorsing a gradational notion of reliability in which evidence can be more or less reliable and in which a comparative assessment of reliability is prominent. Consistent with …

Empirical Evidence And Malpractice Litigation, Philip G. Peters Jr.

Faculty Publications

Critics of medical malpractice litigation believe that expert testimony is often anecdotal and biased. To remedy this problem, several have recently suggested that attorneys should provide and courts should seek reliable empirical evidence of actual clinical norms. Their suggestion should be welcomed. If our expectations are realistic and the design pitfalls are avoided, greater use of use of empirical research will improve the fairness of malpractice adjudication. At least in theory, it could be useful in both the "easy" cases (where it reveals that a consensus standard of care exists) and also some of the harder cases (where clinical practices …

Character Evidence, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

“Other Acts” Evidence: Part Ii, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Hair Comparison Evidence, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Scientific Evidence In Civil And Criminal Cases, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Naturalized Epistemology And The Critique Of Evidence Theory, Dale A. Nance

Faculty Publications

In this article I give a mixed review Allen and Leiter’s naturalized epistemology theory of evidence. I applaud their focus on naturalized epistemology, but I question the claims that they argue follow from it. In some ways, my reaction is that they have not gone far enough in pressing its implications, and I attempt to suggest how further progress might be made along this path. On the whole, I conclude that the antipathy toward algrithms expressed by Allen and Leiter is misplaced.

Who Should Control The Decision To Call A Witness: Respecting A Criminal Defendant's Tactical Choices, Rodney J. Uphoff

Faculty Publications

A law student approached me not long ago to discuss a problem he had encountered while helping to prepare a criminal case for retrial. The defendant's first trial ended with a hung jury. The defendant, Steven Brown, now faced a second trial on the same misdemeanor charge of assaulting a police officer. Although the defendant still wanted to go to trial, Brown told defense counsel that he did not want his elderly father to have to testify again. From defense counsel's standpoint, the father's testimony was critical because he was the only witness corroborating the defendant's version of the event. …

Expert Qualifications: Traps For The Unwary, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.