Law Commons^™

Private Police Regulation And The Exclusionary Remedy: How Washington Can Eliminate The Public/Private Distinction, Jared Rothenberg

Washington Law Review

Private security forces such as campus police, security guards, loss prevention officers, and the like are not state actors covered by the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures nor the Fifth Amendment’s Miranda protections. As members of the umbrella category of “private police,” these private law enforcement agents often obtain evidence, detain individuals, and elicit confessions in a manner that government actors cannot, which can then be lawfully turned over to the government. Though the same statutory law governing private citizens (assault, false imprisonment, trespass, etc.) also regulates private police conduct, private police conduct is not bound by …

Fuoco V. Polisena, 244 A.3d 124 (R.I. 2021), David Marks

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

State V. Hudgen¸ 272 A.3d 1069 (R.I. 2022)., Judd W. Krasher

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Changemakers: Master Of Studies In Law: 'Radical Imagination, Radical Listening', Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Rock And Hard Place Arguments, Jareb Gleckel, Grace Brosofsky

Seattle University Law Review

This Article explores what we coin “rock and hard place” (RHP) arguments in the law, and it aims to motivate mission-driven plaintiffs to seek out such arguments in their cases. The RHP argument structure helps plaintiffs win cases even when the court views that outcome as unfavorable.

We begin by dissecting RHP dilemmas that have long existed in the American legal system. As Part I reveals, prosecutors and law enforcement officials have often taken advantage of RHP dilemmas and used them as a tool to persuade criminal defendants to forfeit their constitutional rights, confess, or give up the chance to …

Assertion And Hearsay, Richard Lloret

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

This article explores the characteristics and functions of assertion and considers how the term influences the definition of hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801. Rule 801(a) defines hearsay by limiting it to words and conduct intended as an assertion, but the rule does not define the term assertion. Courts and legal scholars have focused relatively little attention on the nature and definition of assertion. That is unfortunate, because assertion is a robust concept that has been the subject of intense philosophic study over recent decades. Assertion is not a mere cypher standing in for whatever speech or conduct one …

Unbuckling The Seat Belt Defense In Arkansas, Spencer G. Dougherty

Arkansas Law Review

The “seat belt defense” has been hotly litigated over the decades in numerous jurisdictions across the United States. It is an affirmative defense that, when allowed, reduces a plaintiff’s recovery for personal injuries resulting from an automobile collision where the defendant can establish that those injuries would have been less severe or avoided entirely had the plaintiff been wearing an available seat belt. This is an unsettled legal issue in Arkansas, despite the growing number of cases in which the seat belt defense is raised as an issue. Most jurisdictions, including Arkansas, initially rejected the defense, but the basis for …

Caveat Emptor: Real Property Law’S “Get Out Of Jail Free” Card V. The Property Condition Disclosure Act, Alessandra E. Albano

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Hb 282 - Preservation Of Sexual Assault Evidence, Rebecca A. Dickinson, Alessandra T. Palazzolo

Georgia State University Law Review

This Act extends the time that law enforcement agencies are required to preserve certain evidence of sexual assault. Physical evidence of a reported sexual assault will be preserved for fifty years, and if there is an arrest, for thirty years from the date of arrest or seven years from the sentence’s completion.

Due Process People V. Scott (Decided June 5, 1996)

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process Court Of Appeals

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Between Brady Discretion And Brady Misconduct, Bennett L. Gershman

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The Supreme Court’s decision in Brady v. Maryland presented prosecutors with new professional challenges. In Brady, the Supreme Court held that the prosecution must provide the defense with any evidence in its possession that could be exculpatory. If the prosecution fails to timely turn over evidence that materially undermines the defendant’s guilt, a reviewing court must grant the defendant a new trial. While determining whether evidence materially undermines a defendant’s guilt may seem like a simple assessment, the real-life application of such a determination can be complicated. The prosecution’s disclosure determination can be complicated under the Brady paradigm because …

Revenge Porn, Thomas Lonardo, Tricia P. Martland, Rhode Island Bar Journal

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Causation And "Legal Certainty" In Legal Malpractice Law, Vincent R. Johnson

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

A line of California cases holds that causation of damages in legal malpractice actions must be proven with “legal certainty.” This Article argues that judicial references to legal certainty are ambiguous and threaten to undermine the fairness of legal malpractice litigation as a means for resolving lawyer-client disputes. Courts should eschew the language of legal certainty and plainly state that damages are recoverable if a legal malpractice plaintiff proves, by a preponderance of the evidence, that those losses were factually and proximately caused by the defendant’s breach of duty.

The Paragraph 20 Paradox: An Evaluation Of The Enforcement Of Ethical Rules As Substantive Law, Donald E. Campbell

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

This Article addresses an issue courts across the country continue to struggle with: When are ethics rules appropriately considered enforceable substantive obligations, and when should they only be enforceable through the disciplinary process? The question is complicated by the ethics rules themselves. Paragraph 20 of the Scope section of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct includes seemingly contradictory guidance; it states the Rules are not to be used to establish civil liability, but also that they can be “some evidence” of a violation of a lawyer’s standard of care. Most states have adopted this paradoxal Paragraph 20 language. Consequently, courts …

Hearsay In The Smiley Face: Analyzing The Use Of Emojis As Evidence, Erin Janssen

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

"A Middle Temperature Between The Two": Exploring Intermediate Remedies For The Failure To Comply With Maryland's Eyewitness Identification Statute, Marc A. Desimone Jr.

University of Baltimore Law Review

This article addresses what remedies should be available to a criminal defendant in Maryland who has been identified in an extrajudicial identification procedure that does not comply with the present statutory requirements. Part II of this article provides an overview of the present due process test for evaluating the admissibility of extrajudicial eyewitness identifications, the present Maryland iteration of that test, and alternatives to that approach that have been adopted in other jurisdictions. Part III reviews recent legislative reforms to extrajudicial identification procedures, which are required in Maryland as of January 1, 2016. Section IV.A of this article argues why …

Recent Development: Seley-Radtke V. Hosmane: The Standard Of Proof Requirement In A Purely Private Defamation Action For An Individual Asserting A Common Law Conditional Privilege Is Preponderance Of The Evidence, Makeda Curbeam

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a party seeking to overcome a common law conditional privilege in a purely private defamation suit must do so by a preponderance of the evidence. Seley-Radtke v. Hosmane, 450 Md. 468, 474, 149 A.3d 573, 576 (2016). The court also held that evidentiary issues not addressed by the court of special appeals are not subject to review by the court of appeals. Id. at 510, 149 A.3d at 598 (citing Md. R. 8- 131(b)(1)). Further, the court held that prejudicial evidence irrelevant to a claim is not admissible at trial. Seley-Radtke, 450 …

Law Enforcement Access To Data Across Borders: The Evolving Security And Rights Issues, Jennifer Daskal

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.

Civil Practice And Procedure, John R. Walker, Jaime B. Wisegarver

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Motor Vehicles; Driving While Intoxicated; Section 4511.19; Implied Consent; Aurora V. Kepley, Amie Bruggeman

Akron Law Review

With the constant problem of accidents caused by drinking drivers and the fairly reliable results of breathalyzer tests established, judicial decisions have upheld the statutory scheme providing for its use through an era when rights of an accused have been greatly expanded. It has been held that the breathalyzer test results are not testimonial but physical evidence and therefore not protected by the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Thus, the accused has no constitutional right to refuse to take the test, and the prosecutor may comment at the trial on his refusal relying on its' probative value as to whether …

The Use Of Prior Inconsistent Statements Of Opinion To Impeach: Ohio's Position, Richard Milligan

Akron Law Review

The purpose of this article is to examine prior inconsistent statements of opinion and point out why their exclusion, when offered to impeach, is improper. Ohio's three leading cases on this point will serve to exemplify the improper characterization and exclusion of these statements.

Ohio's "Sacred Seal Of Secrecy": The Rules Of Spousal Incompetency And Martial Privilege In Criminal Cases, Wilson R. Huhn

Akron Law Review

In the remainder of this essay the rules of spousal incompetency and marital privilege are compared and contrasted, the history of the rules in Ohio is traced, the underlying justifications for the rules are discussed, and a pitch is made for repeal of both rules, substituting the single rule of spousal immunity described above.

Recent Development: Hailes V. State: The State May Appeal A Trial Court's Ruling Excluding A Dying Declaration; The Length Of Time Between A Declarant's Statement And Death Is Irrelevant In A Dying Declaration Analysis; The Confrontation Clause Is Inapplicable To Dying Declarations, Lauren A. Panfile

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the State may appeal a trial court’s suppression of a victim’s dying declaration based on the legislative intent of Section 12-302(c)(4)(i) of the Maryland Code, Courts and Judicial Procedure Article (“section 12-302(c)(4)(i)”). Hailes v. State, 442 Md. 488, 497-98, 113 A.3d 608, 613-14 (2015). The court further held that a victim’s statement, made while on life support, was a dying declaration regardless of the fact that the victim died two years after making the statement. Id. at 506, 113 A.3d at 618. Finally, the court held that the Confrontation Clause of the …

Recent Development: Sublet V. State: Authentication Of Evidence From Social Networking Websites Requires A Trial Judge To Find Sufficient Proof From Which A Reasonable Juror Could Conclude That The Evidence Is What The Proponent Claims It To Be, Denise A. Blake

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland, in three consolidated cases, held that a trial judge must determine that evidence from a social networking website meets the “reasonable juror” standard of authentication as a condition precedent to admissibility. Sublet v. State, 442 Md. 632, 678, 113 A.3d 695, 722 (2015). This standard requires a preliminary determination by the trial judge that a reasonable juror could find the evidence is what the proponent claims it to be.

Supreme Court, Bronx County, People Ex Rel. Furde V. New York City Dep't Of Correction, Adam D'Antonio

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Practice And Procedure, Andrew P. Sherrod, Jaime B. Wisegarver

University of Richmond Law Review

This article surveys recent significant developments in Virginia civil practice and procedure. Part I of this article discusses opinions of the Supreme Court of Virginia from June 2013 through June 2014 addressing noteworthy civil procedure topics. Part II addresses amendments to the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia concerning procedural issues during the same period. PartIII discusses legislation enacted by the Virginia General Assembly during its 2014 session that relates to civil practice.

Criminal Law And Procedure, Aaron J. Campbell

University of Richmond Law Review

This article aims to provide a succinct review of noteworthy cases in the areas of criminal law and procedure that the Supreme Court of Virginia and the Court of Appeals of Virginia decided this past year. Instead of covering every ruling or procedural point in a particular case, this article focuses on the "take- away" of the holdings with the most precedential value. This article also summarizes significant changes to criminal law and procedure enacted by the 2014 Virginia General Assembly.

Keep Your “Friends” Close And Your Enemies Closer: Walking The Ethical Tightrope In The Use Of Social Media., John G. Browning

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

This Article will examine the ethical issues posed by lawyers’ use of social media platforms in light of the ABA Ethics Commission 20/20 changes to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Social networking has had a transformative effect both on the way society shares information and on the legal profession. Much of the discussion to date focuses on the discovery and use of evidence from social media sites in criminal cases and civil litigation, but attention must also be directed to the ethical quandaries posed by the legal profession’s use of social media. This Article will consider issues such as …

Evidentiary Standards In The Legal Malpractice Trial-Within-A-Trial., F. Parks Brown

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

Like malpractice actions in general, the standards of proof required for each element of a legal malpractice claim evolved as legal malpractice claims became increasingly common. State and federal courts consequently produced a diverse range of opinions as jurisdictions continually adjust to evolving standards. The courts often seek to balance these standards of proof against their own precedent and the need to serve their particular notions of equity and justice. Perhaps the most contentious of these evolving standards of proof is the current state of the causation element, which is a critical test that must be satisfied to prevail in …