Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Evidence (3)
- Confessions (2)
- Criminal law (2)
- Admissibility of evidence (1)
- Algorithms (1)
-
- Automated Fingerprint Identification (1)
- Bias (1)
- Blind spot (1)
- Breathalyzers (1)
- Child sexual abuse (1)
- Confrontation clause (1)
- Corroboration (1)
- Criminal procedure (1)
- DNA (1)
- DNA evidence (1)
- Daubert standard (1)
- Digital surveillance (1)
- Drug dogs (1)
- Due process of law (1)
- FRT (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Frye standard (1)
- Genotyping (1)
- Hindsight (1)
- Probable cause (1)
- Scientific evidence (1)
- Search (1)
- Search and seizure (1)
- Secrecy (1)
- Seizure (1)
Articles 1 - 14 of 14
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
The Computer Got It Wrong: Facial Recognition Technology And Establishing Probable Cause To Arrest, T.J. Benedict
The Computer Got It Wrong: Facial Recognition Technology And Establishing Probable Cause To Arrest, T.J. Benedict
Washington and Lee Law Review
Facial recognition technology (FRT) is a popular tool among police, who use it to identify suspects using photographs or still-images from videos. The technology is far from perfect. Recent studies highlight that many FRT systems are less effective at identifying people of color, women, older people, and children. These race, gender, and age biases arise because FRT is often “trained” using non-diverse faces. As a result, police have wrongfully arrested Black men based on mistaken FRT identifications. This Note explores the intersection of facial recognition technology and probable cause to arrest.
Courts rarely, if ever, examine FRT’s role in establishing …
“No Earlier Confession To Repeat”: Seibert, Dixon, And Question-First Interrogations, Lee S. Brett
“No Earlier Confession To Repeat”: Seibert, Dixon, And Question-First Interrogations, Lee S. Brett
Washington and Lee Law Review
The Supreme Court’s 2004 decision in Missouri v. Seibert forbade the use of so-called question-first interrogations. In a question-first interrogation, police interrogate suspects without giving Miranda warnings. Once the suspect makes incriminating statements, the police give the warnings and induce the suspect to repeat their earlier admissions.
Lower courts are increasingly interpreting a per curiam Supreme Court case, Bobby v. Dixon, to significantly limit the scope and applicability of Seibert. These courts claim that postwarning statements need only be suppressed under Seibert when there is an “earlier confession to repeat.” In this Note, I argue that this reading …
Comment: Wysiati And False Confessions, Michael R. Hoernlein
Comment: Wysiati And False Confessions, Michael R. Hoernlein
Washington and Lee Law Review
Decades after the Supreme Court mandated in Miranda v. Arizona that police advise suspects of their constitutional rights before custodial interrogation, confusion remains about the contours of the rule, and some law enforcement officers still try to game the system. In his excellent Note, “No Earlier Confession to Repeat”: Seibert, Dixon, and Question-First Interrogations, Lee Brett presents a careful analysis of the legal landscape applicable to so-called question-first interrogations. Mr. Brett offers a compelling argument urging courts not to interpret Bobby v. Dixon as limiting the application of Missouri v. Seibert to two-step (i.e., question-first) interrogations only when …
Secret Conviction Programs, Meghan J. Ryan
Secret Conviction Programs, Meghan J. Ryan
Washington and Lee Law Review
Judges and juries across the country are convicting criminal defendants based on secret evidence. Although defendants have sought access to the details of this evidence—the results of computer programs and their underlying algorithms and source codes—judges have generally denied their requests. Instead, judges have prioritized the business interests of the for-profit companies that developed these “conviction programs” and which could lose market share if the secret algorithms and source codes on which the programs are based were exposed. This decision has jeopardized criminal defendants’ constitutional rights.
Criminal Adjudication, Error Correction, And Hindsight Blind Spots, Lisa Kern Griffin
Criminal Adjudication, Error Correction, And Hindsight Blind Spots, Lisa Kern Griffin
Washington and Lee Law Review
Concerns about hindsight in the law typically arise with regard to the bias that outcome knowledge can produce. But a more difficult problem than the clear view that hindsight appears to provide is the blind spot that it actually has. Because of the conventional wisdom about error review, there is a missed opportunity to ensure meaningful scrutiny. Beyond the confirmation biases that make convictions seem inevitable lies the question whether courts can see what they are meant to assess when they do look closely for error. Standards that require a retrospective showing of materiality, prejudice, or harm turn on what …
The Admissibility Of Trueallele: A Computerized Dna Interpretation System, Katherine L. Moss
The Admissibility Of Trueallele: A Computerized Dna Interpretation System, Katherine L. Moss
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Question Of Necessity: The Conflict Between A Defendant's Right Of Confrontation And A State's Use Of Closed Circuit Television In Child Sexual Abuse Cases
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Police Inventories Of The Contents Of Vehicles And The Exclusionary Rule
Police Inventories Of The Contents Of Vehicles And The Exclusionary Rule
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Reliable Informers And Corroboration
Reliable Informers And Corroboration
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
State Criminal Confession Cases: Subsequent Developments In Cases Reversed By U.S. Supreme Court And Some Current Problems, Wilfred J. Ritz
State Criminal Confession Cases: Subsequent Developments In Cases Reversed By U.S. Supreme Court And Some Current Problems, Wilfred J. Ritz
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Twenty-Five Years Of State Criminal Confession Cases In The U. S. Supreme Court, Wilfred J. Ritz
Twenty-Five Years Of State Criminal Confession Cases In The U. S. Supreme Court, Wilfred J. Ritz
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Protection Against Illegal Meansof Obtaining Evidence, Raymond W. Haman, James H. Flippen, Jr.
Protection Against Illegal Meansof Obtaining Evidence, Raymond W. Haman, James H. Flippen, Jr.
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Evidence-Proper Agency For Determining The Voluntary Character Of A Confession In A Criminal Trial
Evidence-Proper Agency For Determining The Voluntary Character Of A Confession In A Criminal Trial
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Presumption Of Innocence In Criminal Cases
The Presumption Of Innocence In Criminal Cases
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.