Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Evidence (3)
- Article VI (2)
- Patriot Act (2)
- Reservation clause (2)
- Search warrant (2)
-
- Sneak and peak warrant (2)
- Supremacy Clause (2)
- Tenth Amendment (2)
- Absent Declarants (1)
- Conflict of laws (1)
- Conflicts of Law (1)
- Confrontation Clause (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Crawford v. Washington (1)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (1)
- Criminal Procedure (1)
- Customary (1)
- Customary marriage (1)
- Evidence Rules (1)
- Exclusionary Rule (1)
- Exclusive and concurrent legislative powers (1)
- Fact Finding (1)
- Hearsay Declarations (1)
- Hearsay Exception (1)
- Illegally-Obtained Evidence (1)
- Islamic marriage (1)
- James v. Illinois (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Jury (1)
- Marriage (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
State Searches, Federal Cases, And Choice Of Law: Just A Little Respect, John B. Corr
State Searches, Federal Cases, And Choice Of Law: Just A Little Respect, John B. Corr
John (Bernie) Corr
No abstract provided.
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The , James L. Kainen
James L. Kainen
Crawford v. Washington’s historical approach to the confrontation clause establishes that testimonial hearsay inadmissible without confrontation at the founding is similarly inadmissible today, despite whether it fits a subsequently developed hearsay exception. Consequently, the requirement of confrontation depends upon whether an out-of-court statement is hearsay, testimonial, and, if so, whether it was nonetheless admissible without confrontation at the founding. A substantial literature has developed about whether hearsay statements are testimonial or were, like dying declarations, otherwise admissible at the founding. In contrast, this article focuses on the first question – whether statements are hearsay – which scholars have thus far …
Truth, Deterrence, And The Impeachment Exception , James L. Kainen
Truth, Deterrence, And The Impeachment Exception , James L. Kainen
James L. Kainen
James v. Illinois permits illegally-obtained evidence to impeach defendants, but not defense witnesses. Thus far, all courts have construed James to allow impeachment of defendants' hearsay declarations. This article argues against allowing illegally-obtained evidence to impeach defendants' hearsay declarations because doing so unduly diminishes the exclusionary rule's deterrent effect. The distinction between impeaching defendants and defense witnesses disappears when courts allow prosecutors to impeach defendants' hearsay declarations. Because defense witnesses report exculpatory conduct of a defendant who always has a substantial interest in disguising his criminality, their testimony routinely incorporates defendant hearsay. Defense witness testimony thus routinely paves the way …
Accounting For Federalism In State Courts - Exclusion Of Evidence Obtained Lawfully By Federal Agents, Robert M. Bloom, Hillary J. Massey
Accounting For Federalism In State Courts - Exclusion Of Evidence Obtained Lawfully By Federal Agents, Robert M. Bloom, Hillary J. Massey
Robert Bloom
After the terrorist attacks on September 11th, Congress greatly enhanced federal law enforcement powers through enactment of the U.S.A. Patriot Act. The Supreme Court also has provided more leeway to federal officers in the past few decades, for example by limiting the scope of the exclusionary rule. At the same time, many states have interpreted their constitutions to provide greater individual protections to their citizens than provided by the federal constitution. This phenomenon has sometimes created a wide disparity between the investigatory techniques available to federal versus state law enforcement officers. As a result, state courts sometimes must decide whether …
Accounting For Federalism In State Courts - Exclusion Of Evidence Obtained Lawfully By Federal Agents, Robert M. Bloom, Hillary J. Massey
Accounting For Federalism In State Courts - Exclusion Of Evidence Obtained Lawfully By Federal Agents, Robert M. Bloom, Hillary J. Massey
Robert M. Bloom
After the terrorist attacks on September 11th, Congress greatly enhanced federal law enforcement powers through enactment of the U.S.A. Patriot Act. The Supreme Court also has provided more leeway to federal officers in the past few decades, for example by limiting the scope of the exclusionary rule. At the same time, many states have interpreted their constitutions to provide greater individual protections to their citizens than provided by the federal constitution. This phenomenon has sometimes created a wide disparity between the investigatory techniques available to federal versus state law enforcement officers. As a result, state courts sometimes must decide whether …
Requirements Of A Valid Islamic Marriage Vis-À-Vis Requirements Of A Valid Customary Marriage In Nigeria, Olanike Sekinat Odewale Mrs
Requirements Of A Valid Islamic Marriage Vis-À-Vis Requirements Of A Valid Customary Marriage In Nigeria, Olanike Sekinat Odewale Mrs
Olanike Sekinat Adelakun