Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Character evidence (2)
- Dora Klein (2)
- Dorie Klein (2)
- Rule 404(b) (2)
- St. Mary’s University School of Law (2)
-
- Admissibility (1)
- Controlled substances (1)
- Courts (1)
- Courts of appeal (1)
- Due process (1)
- Evidence federal courts (1)
- Evidentiary decisions (1)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (1)
- Federal circuit courts (1)
- Hearsay (1)
- Judges (1)
- Michelson v. United States (1)
- Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (1)
- Other-acts evidence (1)
- Presumed innocent (1)
- Presumption of admissibility (1)
- Presumption of innocence (1)
- Prior criminal convictions (1)
- Rule 404(b)(2) (1)
- Rule of Inclusion (1)
- Rule of exclusion (1)
- Rule of general exclusion (1)
- Rule of inclusion (1)
- Rules of evidence (1)
- Spencer v. Texas (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Courts
One Step Backward: The Ninth Circuit's Unfortunate Rule 404(B) Decision In United States V. Lague, Dora Klein
One Step Backward: The Ninth Circuit's Unfortunate Rule 404(B) Decision In United States V. Lague, Dora Klein
Faculty Articles
The federal courts' current approach to character evidence is widely recognized as problematic. Although Rule 404(b)(1) categorically prohibits the use of character evidence, Rule 404(b)(2) presents a list of examples of permitted purposes that has tempted courts to view the admission of other-acts evidence as proper so long as the evidence is merely relevant to a non-character purpose. Additionally, courts have misconstrued the inclusive structure of Rule 404(b) as creating a presumption
in favor of admissibility. Recent efforts to correct this mistakenly permissive view include decisions by several of the federal circuit courts of appeals recognizing that Rule 404(b) requires …
“Rule Of Inclusion" Confusion, Dora Klein
“Rule Of Inclusion" Confusion, Dora Klein
Faculty Articles
Some rules of evidence are complex. The federal rules governing the admissibility of hearsay statements,' for example, include at least forty different provisions. Numerous judges and scholars have commented on the complexity of the hearsay rules. Not all rules of evidence are complex, however. For example, the federal rules governing the admissibility of character evidence are relatively straightforward: evidence that is offered for the purpose of proving character is inadmissible, subject to a few well-defined exceptions. Despite this relative straightforwardness, many of the federal circuit courts of appeals have overlaid the rules regarding character evidence particularly Rule 404(b)--with unnecessary interpretive …
Evaluating Brady Error Using Narrative Theory: A Proposal For Reform, John B. Mitchell
Evaluating Brady Error Using Narrative Theory: A Proposal For Reform, John B. Mitchell
Faculty Articles
When the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Old Chief v. United States, the Court examined Federal Rule of Evidence 403 in light of a defense offer to stipulate to aspects of the proffered prosecution evidence, purportedly to lessen their prejudicial impact. At the core of the opinion rests the validation of a theory born from such disparate fields as Law and Literature, Sociology, and Narrative Theory. This article argues that, though it was not on the proverbial radar screen of the Court when it decided Old Chief, narrative theory provides the most effective tool available for assessing prejudice …
Testimonial Consistency: The Hobgoblin Of The Federal False Declaration Statute, Sidney Delong
Testimonial Consistency: The Hobgoblin Of The Federal False Declaration Statute, Sidney Delong
Faculty Articles
This article focuses on the inconsistent statement provision of the Federal False Declaration Statute. Part I of this article identifies certain anomalous aspects of perjury that make it particularly difficult to control by threats of punishment. Perjury's resemblance to an innocent mistake creates a risk that criminal sanctions will be misapplied. These sanctions may have counterproductive effects, at times inducing people to commit perjury and at others inhibiting people from correcting inaccurate testimony that they have previously given. Part II demonstrates the way in which the conflict between the goals of deterrence and mitigation is manifested in the federal perjury …