Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Miranda (2)
- 702 (1)
- Admissibility (1)
- Admission (1)
- Boston Marathon bombing (1)
-
- Confession (1)
- Daubert (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Forensic Science (1)
- Fourth amendment (1)
- Gatekeeping (1)
- Incentive (1)
- Interrogation (1)
- Katz (1)
- Phone (1)
- Pretrial Discovery (1)
- Privacy (1)
- Public safety exception (1)
- Reliability (1)
- Riley (1)
- Scientific (1)
- Search (1)
- Technology (1)
- Terrorism (1)
- Tsarnaev (1)
- Warrant (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Discovering Forensic Fraud, Jennifer D. Oliva, Valena E. Beety
Discovering Forensic Fraud, Jennifer D. Oliva, Valena E. Beety
Northwestern University Law Review
This Essay posits that certain structural dynamics, which dominate criminal proceedings, significantly contribute to the admissibility of faulty forensic science in criminal trials. The authors believe that these dynamics are more insidious than questionable individual prosecutorial or judicial behavior in this context. Not only are judges likely to be former prosecutors, prosecutors are “repeat players” in criminal litigation and, as such, routinely support reduced pretrial protections for defendants. Therefore, we argue that the significant discrepancies between the civil and criminal pretrial discovery and disclosure rules warrant additional scrutiny.
In the criminal system, the near absence of any pretrial discovery means …
Riley And Abandonment: Expanding Fourth Amendment Protection Of Cell Phones, Abigail Hoverman
Riley And Abandonment: Expanding Fourth Amendment Protection Of Cell Phones, Abigail Hoverman
Northwestern University Law Review
In light of the privacy concerns inherent to personal technological devices, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision in 2014 recognizing the need for categorical heightened protection of cell phones during searches incident to arrest in Riley v. California. This Note argues for expansion of heightened protections for cell phones in the context of abandoned evidence because the same privacy concerns apply. This argument matters because state and federal courts have not provided the needed protection to abandoned cell phones pre- or post-Riley.
Revisiting The Public Safety Exception To Miranda For Suspected Terrorists: Dzhokhar Tsarnaev And The Bombing Of The 2013 Boston Marathon, Hannah Lonky
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology
This Comment examines the application of the public safety exception to Miranda to cases of domestic terrorism, looking particularly at the case of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing. By comparing the Department of Justice’s War on Terror policies to the Warren Court’s rationale for Miranda, this Comment argues that courts should require law enforcement officers to have reasonable knowledge of an immediate threat to public safety before they may properly invoke the Quarles public safety exception.
Gatekeeping Science: Using The Structure Of Scientific Research To Distinguish Between Admissibility And Weight In Expert Testimony, David L. Faigman, Christopher Slobogin, John Monahan
Gatekeeping Science: Using The Structure Of Scientific Research To Distinguish Between Admissibility And Weight In Expert Testimony, David L. Faigman, Christopher Slobogin, John Monahan
Northwestern University Law Review
Fundamental to all evidence rules is the division of responsibility between the judge, who determines the admissibility of evidence, and the jury, which gauges its weight. In most evidentiary contexts, such as those involving hearsay and character, threshold admissibility obligations are clear and relatively uncontroversial. The same is not true for scientific evidence. The complex nature of scientific inference, and in particular the challenges of reasoning from group data to individual cases, has bedeviled courts. As a result, courts vary considerably on how they define the judge’s gatekeeping task under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and its state equivalents.
This …
Moving Beyond Miranda: Concessions For Confessions, Scott W. Howe
Moving Beyond Miranda: Concessions For Confessions, Scott W. Howe
Northwestern University Law Review
The law governing police interrogation provides perverse incentives. For criminal suspects, the law rewards obstruction and concealment. For police officers, it honors deceit and psychological aggression. For the courts and the rest of us, it encourages blindness and rationalization. This Article contends that the law could help foster better behaviors. The law could incentivize criminals to confess without police trickery and oppression. It could motivate police officers involved in obtaining suspect statements to avoid chicanery and duress. And, it could summon courts and the rest of us to speak more truthfully about whether suspect admissions are the product of informed, …