Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Hearsay (2)
- Admissibility (1)
- Admission of Battered Woman Syndrome evidence; admission of Rape Trauma Syndrome evidence; Daubert standard; inadequacy of Battered Woman Syndrome methodology; scientific reliability of Battered Woman Syndrome; courts as gatekeepers of reliable scientific evidence; four factors of Daubert; social sciences; State v. Saldana; State v. Black; scientific reliability of Rape Trauma Syndrome; defense-oriented social science evidence; Black Rage; Black Rage defenses; (1)
- Admission of evidence (1)
- Balance (1)
-
- Character evidence (1)
- Collateral matters (1)
- Confrontation Clause (1)
- Confrontation clause (1)
- Constitutional rights (1)
- Crawford v. Washington (1)
- Credibility (1)
- Cross-examination (1)
- Death penalty appeal (1)
- Due process (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Extra-record evidence (1)
- Impeachment (1)
- Indicia of reliability (1)
- Michigan v. Lucas (1)
- New trial time limits (1)
- Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals (1)
- Olden v. Kentucky (1)
- Perjury (1)
- Probative value (1)
- Rape shield statutes (1)
- Recollection (1)
- Right of confrontation (1)
- Scientific evidence (1)
- Sex crimes (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Criminal Law—When The Pillow Talks: Arkansas's Rape Shield Statute Bars Dna Evidence Excluding The Defendant As The Source Of Semen. Thacker V. State, 2015 Ark. 406, 474 S.W.3d 65., Lacon Marie Smith
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Evidence—Sixth Amendment And The Confrontation Clause—Testimonial Trumps Reliable: The United States Supreme Court Reconsiders Its Approach To The Confrontation Clause. Crawford V. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004)., Kristen Sluyter
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Gender Gap: Revealing Inequities In Admission Of Social Science Evidence In Criminal Cases, Janet C. Hoeffel
The Gender Gap: Revealing Inequities In Admission Of Social Science Evidence In Criminal Cases, Janet C. Hoeffel
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Newly Available, Not Newly Discovered, Penny J. White
Newly Available, Not Newly Discovered, Penny J. White
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
Advances in science have made it possible to discover new evidence. This newly discovered evidence is not always admissible as evidence. This essay suggests methods by which appellate courts may approach a balance between the rigid application of limitation periods in serious criminal cases and admitting evidence that proves innocence.
The Response To Brecheen V. Reynolds: Oklahoma’S System For Evaluating Extra-Record Constitutional Claims In Death Penalty Cased, Jeremy B. Lowrey
The Response To Brecheen V. Reynolds: Oklahoma’S System For Evaluating Extra-Record Constitutional Claims In Death Penalty Cased, Jeremy B. Lowrey
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
This article attempts to define the “abuse of discretion” standard of review. The article begins by distinguishing the three types of appellate review. It then focuses on review of discretion. Articles written by Professors Maurice Rosenburg, Robert C. Post, and Judge Henery J. Friendly are next analyzed in order to further evaluate judicial discretionary decisionmaking. Caselaw is next used to discuss how courts have attempted to define and apply the abuse of discretion standard. Primary cases considered include Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Pierce v. Underwood, Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., and Koon v. United States. Finally, …
Impeachment Of One's Own Witness By Prior Inconsistent Statements Under The Federal And Arkansas Rules Of Evidence, Samuel A. Perroni
Impeachment Of One's Own Witness By Prior Inconsistent Statements Under The Federal And Arkansas Rules Of Evidence, Samuel A. Perroni
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.