Evidence Commons^™

Parent-Child Incest: Proof At Trial Without Testimony In Court By The Victim, Dustin P. Ordway

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note argues that the incest victim should not testify personally at trial. Rather, the child's testimony should be replaced with tape-recorded pretrial examinations of the victim by an expert, supplemented by the in-court testimony of the examining expert. Part I discusses how the present system of requiring in-court testimony by the victim harms the child, fails to correct the incest problem, and produces unreliable evidence. Part II outlines and discusses the merits of the proposed reform. Part ill examines the proposed reform in light of the defendant's constitutional rights to due process and to confront witnesses against him. The …

Criminal Procedure—Scope Of The Exclusionary Rule—Inevitable Discovery Exception Adopted, Melanie J. Strigel

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Equal Access To Evidence: The Case For The Defense Use Of Immunity For Essential Witnesses, Andrea Lyon

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Admissibility Of Expert Testimony On The Issue Of Eyewitness Identification In Criminal Trials, 2 N. Ill. U. L. Rev. 59 (1981), Edward B. Arnolds, William K. Carroll, Michael P. Seng

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Faces Without Features: The Surface Validity Of Criminal Inferences, Peter Lushing

Articles

This article will offer nonempirical grounds to show that instructed inferences operate as the dissenters believe, at least when the instruction does not explicitly refer to the evidence at trial, but to occurrences in general.

Perils Of The Rulemaking Process: The Development, Application, And Unconstitutionality Of Rule 804(B)(3)'S Penal Interest Exception, Peter W. Tague

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

As the culmination of a decade of rulemaking, in 1975 Congress enacted the Federal Rules of Evidence, which include in rule 804(b)(3) an exception to the hearsay rule that allows federal courts to admit statements against penal interest. Having reviewed previously unpublished memoranda and nonpublic tape recordings of the deliberations of the Advisory and Standing Committees to the Judicial Conference and the Special Subcommittee on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws of the House Judiciary Committee, Professor Tague explores the development of rule 804(b)(3), one of the more controversial rules that emerged from that rulemaking process. After analyzing rule 804(b)(3) and …

The Federal Rules Of Evidence: Six Years After, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Federal Rules of Evidence have been in effect since 1975. Six years of experience is not much time in which to assess such a complex and important body of law. Nevertheless, there is now some "evidence" of the impact of the Federal Rules on the various states and circuits.

The Rules do seem to have proved successful enough to stimulate widespread imitation. Approximately half the states in the United States have or will very shortly have evidence codes patterned substantially on the Rules, even down to their numbers. Many of the remaining states (e.g., Iowa, Illinois, and Pennsylvania) have …