Law Commons^™

Extending A Qualified Evidentiary Privilege To Confidential Communications Between Employees And Their Union Representatives, Michael D. Moberly

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Suppressing The Incriminating Statements Of Foreigners, John Quigley

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Yes, Then No, Means No: Current Issues, Trends, And Problems In Post-Penetration Rape, Tiffany Bohn

Northern Illinois University Law Review

Post-penetration rape describes the scenario when, at some point after consensual intercourse begins, one of the participants asks that the intercourse cease and the other does not desist. This situation is one of the more recently recognized forms of acquaintance rape. This recognition comes with various nuances and complexities that have caused a split amongst courts regarding how to deal with it when it arises in criminal prosecutions. One significant concern in the recognition of post-penetration rape as a rape rather than a battery or other crime is the need to strike a balance between providing recourse in the justice …

The Criminal Defence Lawyer's Role, David Layton

Dalhousie Law Journal

Defence lawyers often fight to prevent the conviction of people who have committed serious crimes. How can this role be justified? In providing his answer the author generally accepts the traditional view of criminal lawyering according to which defence counsel "does good" by ensuring that the state does not obtain a conviction in the absence of proof beyond a reasonable doubt based on admissible and reliable evidence Ethical advocacy in the criminal context is thus heavily influenced by a conception of justice that includes not only the search for truth but also due process rights for accused persons. The author …

Between "Merit Inquiry" And "Rigorous Analysis": Using Daubert To Navigate The Gray Areas Of Federal Class Action Certification, Elizabeth C. Burch

Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

In recent years, the class action certification hearing has become the latest forum for disputes over the reliability of expert testimony. Since these hearings may involve complex technical matters, litigants frequently try to introduce expert testimony to either establish or challenge the basic requirements for class certification. Yet, most courts do not conduct a Daubert analysis before admitting expert testimony during certification, evaluate the evidence according to a uniform standard, or adequately weigh opposing expert opinions. Even though the Federal Rules of Evidence codify procedures to ensure the reliability of expert testimony, courts have been reluctant to employ them during …

Behavioral Science Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: Reflections Of A Skeptic, Mark S. Brodin

ExpressO

The piece briefly traces the history of the use of social science in the courtroom, and proceeds to critically measure this form of proof (particularly “syndrome” evidence) against both the reliability standards imposed by Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and the traditional requirements for admission of expert testimony. Drawing upon empirical research concerning juries and decision-making as well as transcripts of the use of behavioral evidence at trial, I conclude that much of this testimony should be rejected. Rather than providing meaningful assistance to the jury, social science experts can distort the accuracy of the fact-finding process and imperil …

Spin Control And The High-Profile Client -- Should The Attorney-Client Privilege Extend To Communications With Public Relations Consultants?, Ann Murphy

ExpressO

The use of public relations consultants in connection with high-profile cases is a relatively new development. Public relations firms are advertising that their advice is necessary when celebrities face criminal charges. It is beyond speculation that such advice may be helpful, but should such advice be protected from disclosure under the attorney-client privilege? Privileges are to be recognized “only within the narrowest limits required by principle.” Public relations consultants transmit information to the public. The communications are not meant to be confidential. These communications do not fall within the purposes or the history of the attorney-client privilege.

Forecasting Harm: The Law And Science Of Risk Assessment Among Prisoners, Predators, And Patients, John Monahan

ExpressO

Scientifically valid instruments are being used for the first time to assess an individual’s risk of violence in criminal sentencing and in the civil commitment of mental patients and sexual predators. Risk factors on these instruments pertain to what the person is (e.g., gender), what the person has (e.g., personality disorder), what the person has done (e.g., past violence), and what has been done to the person (e.g., past victimization). In this Article, I argue that in criminal law, with its emphasis on blameworthiness for actions taken, the admissibility of scientifically valid risk factors is properly constrained to those that …

“Which One Of You Did It?” Criminal Liability For “Causing Or Allowing” The Death Of A Child, Lissa Griffin

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Summerlin V. Stewart And Ring Retroactivity, Tonya G. Newman

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants a trial before a jury. Until the Supreme Court decided Ring v. Arizona, however, nine states wholly or partially surrendered a portion of the jury's role to a sentencing judge. Specifically, those states allowed sentencing judges to make factual determinations regarding sentencing considerations by which capital defendants became eligible for the death penalty. The Ring Court halted the use of sentencing considerations to erode the jury's fundamental role in preserving accuracy and fairness of criminal proceedings, holding that the Sixth Amendment requires that a jury make factual findings on all elements, including sentencing …

Contaminating The Verdict: The Problem Of Juror Misconduct, Bennett L. Gershman

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Courtroom Technology: For Trial Lawyers The Future Is Now, Fredric I. Lederer

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Australia And The United States: Two Common Criminal Justice Systems Uncommonly At Odds, Paul Marcus, Vicki Waye

Faculty Publications

At first glance the criminal justice systems of Australia and the United States look strikingly similar. With common law roots from England, they both emphasize the adversary system, the roleof the advocate, the presumption of innocence, and an appeals process. Upon closer reflection,however, they appear starkly different. From both Australian and U.S. perspectives, the authorsexplore those differences, examining important features such as the exclusion of evidence, rules regarding interrogation, the entrapment defense, and the open nature of trials. The Article concludes with an analysis of the reasons for those differences, reasons that heavily relate back to the founding of the …

Federal Court Adjudication Of State Prisoner Claims For Post-Conviction Dna Testing: A Bifurcated Approach, Dylan Ruga

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “Undoubtedly, there are innocent people in prison. Moreover, it is probable that the wrongly convicted, if given a chance to conduct DNA testing on evidence used against them at trial, could establish their innocence. […]

Part II of this Comment will examine the reasoning behind recent circuit court decisions concerning prisoners’ rights to post-conviction genetic testing. I will explain that a bifurcated approach is the appropriate paradigm for reviewing these claims and demonstrate why three of the four circuit courts erred in their analyses. This part also will review the Supreme Court decisions cited by the circuit courts and …

The Central Park Five, The Scottsboro Boys, And The Myth Of The Bestial Black Man, N. Jeremi Duru

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.

State V. Chauvin: Determining The Admissibility Of A Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome Diagnosis As Substantive Evidence Of Sexual Abuse, Melissa T. Lonegrass

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

Silence: Insolubly Ambiguous And Deadly: The Constitutional, Evidentiary And Moral Reasons For Excluding ‘Lack Of Remorse’ Testimony And Argument In Capital Sentencing Proceedings, Jules Epstein

Jules Epstein

No abstract provided.

Crawford V. Washington And The Irretrievable Breakdown Of A Union: Separating The Confrontation Clause From The Hearsay Rule, Thomas J. Reed

Thomas J Reed

No abstract provided.

Private Lands Conservation In The Solomon Islands, Craig Corona, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center

Books, Reports, and Studies

69 p. ; 28 cm

A Non-Romantic View Of Expert Testimony, Lewis H. Larue, David S. Caudill

Scholarly Articles

The Daubert trilogy as a whole deflects attention away from abstract identifications of scientific validity (including the demarcation controversy aimed at rooting out allegedly junk science from the courtroom), and toward the application of expertise to the particular case at hand. That emphasis on application is reflected as well in post-trilogy scholarship, wherein we see three patterns or contours that both help quiet the debates and provide useful guidance to judges and lawyers. First, there is a pragmatic recognition, in various forms, that the focus should be on how science is being used rather than on science in the abstract. …

Judges As Film Critics: New Approaches To Filmic Evidence, Jessica Silbey

Faculty Scholarship

This Article exposes internal contradictions in case law deciding the use and admissibility of film as evidence. Based on a review of more than ninety state and federal cases dating from 1923 to the present, the Article explains how the source of these contradictions is the frequent miscategorization of film as "demonstrative evidence," that category of evidence that purports to illustrate other evidence rather than to be directly probative of some fact at issue. The Article further demonstrates how these contradictions are based on two venerable jurisprudential anxieties. One is the concern about the growing trend toward replacing the traditional …

Judges As Film Critics: New Approaches To Filmic Evidence, Jessica Silbey

Faculty Scholarship

This Article exposes internal contradictions in case law concerning the use and admissibility of film as evidence. Based on a review of more than ninety state and federal cases dating from 1923 to the present, the Article explains how the source of these contradictions is the frequent miscategorization of film as “demonstrative evidence,” evidence that purports to illustrate other evidence, rather than to be directly probative of some fact at issue. The Article further demonstrates how these contradictions are based on two venerable jurisprudential anxieties. One is the concern about the growing trend toward replacing the traditional testimony of live …

Christian V. Gray: The Oklahoma Supreme Court Accepts The Daubert Standard, Debra W. Mccormick, Randon J. Grau

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Wild Dreamers: Meditation On The Admissibility Of Dream Talk, Louise Harmon

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

United States V. Irving, Jared Spitalnick

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Standards Of Evidence In Administrative Proceedings, William H. Kuenhle

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rethinking The Role Of Expert Testimony Regarding The Reliability Of Eyewitness Identifications In New York, Scott Woller

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Are Your Eyes Deceiving You?: The Evidentiary Crisis Regarding The Admissibility Of Computer Generated Evidence, Betsy S. Fiedler

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Epistemology Legalized: Or, Truth, Justice, And The American Way, Susan Haack

Articles

No abstract provided.

Postscript: Another Look At Patane And Seibert, The 2004 Miranda 'Poisoned Fruit' Cases, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Some months after I finished writing an article that, inter alia, discussed the lower court opinions in Patane and Seibert (an article that appears elsewhere in this issue of the Journa),1 the Supreme Court handed down its decisions in those cases.2 In Patane, a 5-4 majority held admissible a Glock pistol located as a result of a failure to comply with Miranda. In Seibert, a 5-4 majority agreed with the state court that a "second confession," one obtained after the police had deliberately used a two-stage interrogation technique designed to undermine the Miranda warnings, was inadmissible. 3 In Patane, Justice …