Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law

1993

Selected Works

Evidence

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Comparing Similarly Situated People In Disparate Treatment Cases, David G. Karro Jan 1993

Comparing Similarly Situated People In Disparate Treatment Cases, David G. Karro

David G. Karro

I wrote this in 1993 for paralegals and new attorneys who were having trouble understanding the concept of comparing similarly situated people in order to prove motive. Many lawyers and paralegals approach the topic mechanically, without any real conception of what makes a comparison of the treatment of people probative, or not probative, of intentional discrimination. Although fifteen years old as of the time of this writing (2008), I believe the approach remains valid and still has significant pedagogical value for newcomer to the area. The citations are also useful for lawyers under who need a quick way of getting …

Go to article

The Trial Judge As Gatekeeper For Scientific Evidence: Will Ohio Rule Of Evidence 102 Frustrate The Ohio Courts' Role Under Daubert V. Merrell Dow?, Chris Mcneil Jan 1993

The Trial Judge As Gatekeeper For Scientific Evidence: Will Ohio Rule Of Evidence 102 Frustrate The Ohio Courts' Role Under Daubert V. Merrell Dow?, Chris Mcneil

Christopher B. McNeil, J.D., Ph.D.

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Reading Gaol Revisited: Admission Of Uncharged Misconduct Evidence In Sex Offender Cases, Thomas J. Reed Dec 1992

Reading Gaol Revisited: Admission Of Uncharged Misconduct Evidence In Sex Offender Cases, Thomas J. Reed

Thomas J Reed

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Protecting Criminal Defendants' Rights When The Government Adduces Scientific Evidence: The Confrontation Clause And Other Alternatives─A Response To Professor Giannelli, James W. Diehm Dec 1992

Protecting Criminal Defendants' Rights When The Government Adduces Scientific Evidence: The Confrontation Clause And Other Alternatives─A Response To Professor Giannelli, James W. Diehm

James W. Diehm

In his article Professor Giannelli articulates quite clearly the confrontation issues that arise when the government seeks to introduce scientific evidence testimony in a criminal case." His work is helpful to our understanding of the problems that develop in the limited contexts of expert testimony and laboratory reports. It also provides valuable insights into the relationship between the Confrontation Clause and the hearsay rules. However, perhaps most important is the contribution that he makes to our understanding of the right of confrontation and our attempts to define that right and its limitations. While I find myself to be in general …

Go to article