Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 28 of 28
Full-Text Articles in Law
Know Every Document And Piece Of Evidence In Your File, Rachel Brockl
Know Every Document And Piece Of Evidence In Your File, Rachel Brockl
Publications
Knowing every document and piece of evidence in your case file is imperative to competent preparation of your case. While this may sound obvious, many attorneys fail to follow this advisement to their own peril. The reasons for knowing your case file in and out are threefold: (1) you want to be the case master, (2) you do not want to be caught off-guard, and (3) your reputation is on the line.
Courses Tethering Evidence And Trial Advocacy/Mock Trial, Chris Behan
Courses Tethering Evidence And Trial Advocacy/Mock Trial, Chris Behan
Articles About GGU Law
No abstract provided.
Why Cops Lie, Peter Keane
Why Cops Lie, Peter Keane
Publications
Police officer perjury in court to justify illegal dope searches is commonplace. One of the dirty little not-so-secret secrets of the criminal justice system is undercover narcotics officers intentionally lying under oath. It is a perversion of the American justice system that strikes directly at the rule of law. Yet it is the routine way of doing business in courtrooms everywhere in America.
Ninth Circuit Strikes Out On Hearsay, Peter Keane
Ninth Circuit Strikes Out On Hearsay, Peter Keane
Publications
The recent Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals opinion, United States v. Barry Bonds , is a murky distortion of an important Federal Rule of Evidence. Quite apart from any celebrity status about a decision regarding the upcoming perjury trial of the former Giants' slugger, the ruling significantly affects the admissibility of evidence in the federal courts in an unfortunate and erroneous way.
Evidence, Joseph B. Harvey
Evidence, Joseph B. Harvey
Cal Law Trends and Developments
The principal developments and trends to be noted in the law of evidence appeared this year in appellate Court decisions. The legislative changes were few. Only one legislative change seems likely to be of any significance and will be felt primarily by drivers accused of being under the influence of intoxicating liquor. For lawyers, the notable developments appear in the case law; it is likely that the courts will remain the primary arena for the development of the law of evidence for some time to come.
Limits Of The Inevitable Discovery Doctrine In United States V. Young: The Intersection Of Private Security Guards, Hotel Guests, And The Fourth Amendment, Lauren Young Epstein
Limits Of The Inevitable Discovery Doctrine In United States V. Young: The Intersection Of Private Security Guards, Hotel Guests, And The Fourth Amendment, Lauren Young Epstein
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note analyzes the Young court’s opinion and the potential consequences of the majority’s cursory rejection of the government’s inevitable discovery argument. This Note also reconciles the differing applications of the inevitable discovery doctrine by the Young majority and dissent and highlights the speculative nature of employing the inevitable discovery doctrine based on the facts of Young. Part I of this Note presents the background of the case and the historical development of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, focusing on the inevitable discovery doctrine as articulated by the Supreme Court in Nix v. Williams. Part II outlines the Young decision and analyzes …
People V. Granados [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Granados [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant was entitled to modification of his conviction of first degree murder to second degree murder because no competent evidence established that he engaged in sexual molestation of a child under the age of 14.
People V. Craig, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Craig, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Without a showing of premeditation or a showing that a murder was committed in an attempt to commit rape, a first degree murder conviction should have been a second degree murder conviction for the killing of the female victim by defendant.
Daggett V. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co., Jesse W. Carter
Daggett V. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co., Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Where impeachment evidence regarding the safe speed for operating a train was admissible and railway failed to request a limiting instruction, husband properly recovered for the loss of his wife and two minor children after a collision.
People V. Duroncelay [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Duroncelay [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant's rights were not violated and results of the alcohol test were properly admitted in evidence in trial for driving under the influence of alcohol when extraction was made in a medically approved manner and was incident to the lawful arrest.
People V. Moore [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Moore [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A verdict of first-degree murder was proper under the felony murder doctrine because the evidence showed that the killing occurred in the course of an attempted rape.
People V. Hardenbrook, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Hardenbrook, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
The prior consistent statement of a witness was properly admitted to refute an inference of recent fabrication of the testimony. A lay witness was not competent to testify as to defendant's ability to commit premeditated murder.
People V. Riser [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Riser [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
In a capital murder prosecution, a trial court's grant of the prosecution's challenge to a juror, who stated that in no event would he vote for the death penalty, was not error.
People V. Linson, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Linson, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant was properly convicted of second degree burglary because there was sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict, and the prosecutor did not commit prejudicial misconduct in his closing argument to the jury.
People V. Crooker [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Crooker [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant's conviction for first-degree murder was proper where defendant failed to show that he did not receive fair trial as conflicting testimony about voluntariness of confession and denial of attorney during questioning supported jury verdict.
People V. Cole [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Cole [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Medical opinion as to whether the victim's wound could have been self-inflicted was admissible and sufficient evidence supported the verdict finding defendant guilty of first-degree murder.
People Ex Rel. Department Of Public Works V. Dunn [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People Ex Rel. Department Of Public Works V. Dunn [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A trial court improperly struck a witness's evidence and instructed the jury to disregard all of his testimony regarding a lease because the lease was a proper element for consideration in a determination of compensation for a taking of property.
People V. Citrino [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Citrino [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant's possession of tools that had been taken in a burglary could be inferred from the fact that the tools had been abandoned, and defendant's recently driven car was found nearby.
Calhoun V. Superior Court Of San Diego County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Calhoun V. Superior Court Of San Diego County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Writ of prohibition to restrain trial court from trying petitioner on charges of conspiring to receive political contributions from persons licensed to sell alcoholic beverages was denied because there was sufficient evidence to support indictment.
People V. Tarantino [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Tarantino [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant's convictions for two counts of extortion and for conspiracy to commit extortion were not proper. Recordings constituted a substantial and important part of the evidence and were illegally obtained.
People V. Penny, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Penny, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A conviction for involuntary manslaughter was reversed because the jury was erroneously instructed on a civil standard of negligence rather than criminal negligence and the lack of due caution and circumspection.
People V. Simpson, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Simpson, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
An accomplice's testimony did not have to be corroborated as to every fact to which he testified when there was other corroborative evidence showing that the accomplice was telling the truth.
People V. Carmen [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Carmen [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Evidence of another crime, part of the same criminal act for which defendant was on trial, was admissible at defendant's trial.
Carroll V. Superior Court Of San Francisco [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Carroll V. Superior Court Of San Francisco [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
In an individual's personal injury action, photographs taken of an accident scene by the defendant corporation for use by its attorneys were privileged and were not subject to inspection by the individual.
People V. Braddock [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Braddock [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
An alleged conflict between the information and the evidence was not grounds for reversal of defendant's conviction where the substance of the indictment was sufficient to give defendant notice of the offense of which he was accused.
People V. Costa [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Costa [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A deceased passenger's statement that defendant caused an automobile accident was admissible in defendant's trial for manslaughter as a spontaneous declaration.
People V. Dessauer, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Dessauer, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A defendant's murder trial did not violate due process where evidence was in form of transcript testimony taken at preliminary examination, agreed to by defendant's counsel and, showed that the issue of guilt and sanity were separately considered.
Nichols V. Mccoy [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Nichols V. Mccoy [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Plaintiff's argument that it was error to allow toxicologist to testify to the contents of an official record was without merit because there was no objection to the testimony at trial; hence, on appeal it was too late to challenge the admission.