Evidence Commons^™

Where Did My Privilege Go? Congress And Its Discretion To Ignore The Attorney-Client Privilege, Don Berthiaume, Jeffrey Ansley

Don R Berthiaume

“The right to counsel is too important to be passed over for prosecutorial convenience or executive branch whimsy. It has been engrained in American jurisprudence since the 18th century when the Bill of Rights was adopted... However, the right to counsel is largely ineffective unless the confidential communications made by a client to his or her lawyer are protected by law.”[1] So said Senator Arlen Specter on February 13, 2009, just seven months before Congress chose to ignore the very privilege he lauded. Why then, if the right to counsel is as important as Senator Specter articulated, does Congress maintain …

Justicia Militar Y Derechos Humanos, Claudio Fuentes Maureira

Claudio Fuentes Maureira

En diciembre de 2010 se publicó una reforma a la justicia militar que excluyó a los civiles de su jurisdicción, lo que fue celebrado por el Gobierno como un significativo paso hacia la democratización de esta jurisdicción, la misma que le valió a Chile una condena internacional en 2005. No obstante, mantuvo la competencia de tribunales militares para conocer delitos cometidos por miembros de las Fuerzas Armadas y de Orden, lo cual sigue estando por debajo de los estándares que obligan a Chile. A ello se suma que aún está pendiente la reforma orgánica y procedimental de la justicia militar, …

Plea Bargaining, Discovery, And The Intractable Problem Of Impeachment Disclosures, R. Michael Cassidy

Vanderbilt Law Review

Several recent high-profile cases have illustrated flaws with the government's discovery practices in criminal cases and have put prosecutors across the country on the defensive about their compliance with disclosure obligations. The conviction of former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens on ethics charges was set aside after it was revealed that federal prosecutors withheld notes of an interview with a key government witness; one member of the Stevens prosecution team who was under investigation for contempt subsequently committed suicide. The Supreme Court remanded a double murder case from Tennessee for potential resentencing after it was revealed that state prosecutors had withheld …

J.D.B. V. North Carolina And The Reasonable Person, Christopher Jackson

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

This Term, the Supreme Court was presented with a prime opportunity to provide some much-needed clarification on a "backdrop" issue of law-one of many topics that arises in a variety of legal contexts, but is rarely analyzed on its own terms. In J.D.B. v. North Carolina, the Court considered whether age was a relevant factor in determining if a suspect is "in custody" for Miranda purposes, and thus must have her rights read to her before being questioned by the police. Miranda, like dozens of other areas of law, employs a reasonable person test on the custodial question: it asks …

El Manejo De La Incertidumbre Judicial: La Construcción De La Duda Razonable En El Sistema Procesal Penal / Management Of Judicial Uncertainty: The Construction Of The Reasonable Doubt Standard Under The Criminal Procedure System, Claudio Fuentes Maureira

Claudio Fuentes Maureira

The Chilean criminal procedure reform introduced to the Chilean legal culture many foreign institutions. In every case the idea behind it was to change specific behaviours of the old system. One of these institutions was the concept or idea of the standard of proof, mainly the introduction in article 340 of the current Code of Criminal Procedure of the beyond reasonable doubt standard.

The paper explores, ten years after the adoption of the new system, how the the tribunals have understood and incorporated this concept, and specifically the beyond reasonable doubt standard. In terms of methodology the paper focuses, in …

Comentario Del Fallo De La Corte De Apelaciones De Concepción Sobre Exclusión Probatoria En Juicios De Familia: ¿Realidad O Ficción?, Claudio Fuentes Maureira

Claudio Fuentes Maureira

El presente documento destaca la relevancia de una reciente sentencia de la Corte de Apelaciones de Concepción en materia de derecho procesal de Familia. En ella la Corte establece una sana línea jurisprudencial que fija una expectativa de conducta por parte del juez de familia respecto de cómo deben encarar el incidente de exclusión probatoria que se da en el contexto de la audiencia preparatoria. Asimismo, qué tipo de razonamiento deben llevar a cabo para resolver la solicitud de exclusión planteada y cuáles son los mínimos argumentos que su decisión de exclusión debe considerar.

A Theory Of The Perverse Verdict, Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

The concept of a perverse verdict is one that pervades the Criminal justice system of nearly all common law jurisdictions. The English Criminal Justice system is no exception and the concept has become institutionalised as if it were a true occurrence. This paper challenges the idea and argues that it is, technically, a legal non-event given the system of trial by jury. The theory is that besides the jury, no one else is invested with the power and authority to declare a verdict and this position is supported both by legal custom and the mechanism of the criminal justice system. …

"Introduction" (Chapter 1) Of Stories About Science In Law: Literary And Historical Images Of Acquired Expertise (Ashgate 2011), David S. Caudill

Working Paper Series

This is the introductory chapter of Stories About Science in Law: Literary and Historical Images of Acquired Expertise (Ashgate, 2011), explaining that the book presents examples of how literary accounts can provide a supplement to our understanding of science in law. Challenging the view that law and science are completely different, I focus on stories that explore the relationship between law and science, and identify cultural images of science that prevail in legal contexts. In contrast to other studies on the transfer and construction of expertise in legal settings, the book considers the intersection of three interdisciplinary projects-- law and …

Lawyers Judging Experts: Oversimplifying Science And Undervaluing Advocacy To Construct An Ethical Duty?, David S. Caudill

Working Paper Series

My focus is on an apparent trend at the intersection of the fields of evidentiary standards for expert admissibility and professional responsibility, namely the eagerness to place more ethical responsibilities on lawyers to vet their proffered expertise to ensure its reliability. My reservations about this trend are not only based on its troubling implications for the lawyer’s duty as a zealous advocate, which already has obvious limitations (because of lawyers’ conflicting duties to the court), but are also based on the problematic aspects of many reliability determinations. To expect attorneys—and this is what the proponents of a duty to vet …

Curtains, Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

This is the story of life in all its glory and eternal ramifications. This is the story of us.

I Wept, Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

It is not always what we expect to find in love but sometimes, we look in the worng places. We fail to notice that what we always wanted and sought was always in front of us.

Vanity Of Vanities, Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

All that we see and all that we do are emptied into the eternal abyss of nothingness and vain glory. All the we have and all own us are intertwined in the great deception of man. Vanity of vanities, says the preacher, all is vanity

A Criminal Moment In Time, Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

Criminal law jurisprudence considers the concepts of motive, intent and the forbidden act integral to the justice process. Throughout the common law jurisdictions, this trio overshadows a central theme that is a precursor to all criminal acts – the idea of a social responsibility continuum or cognitive dependency. While motive is dispositional on a wider application, intent is situational and is a product of one’s socio-cultural experience. The forbidden act, though central to the process, constitutes ‘a faithful mirror of thought’ – the consummation of a deliberate and manipulated cognition. The nexus between the three subjects extends beyond the Cartesan …

Jury Deliberations – How Do Reasoning Skills Interplay With Decision-Making?, Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

We may well wonder how the Casey Anthony reached its verdict in spite of what many of us thought was a raft of compelling evidence. In order to understand some of the nuances at play, it is important to understand some of the issues that confront a jury and how the criminal justice system ensures or attempts to ensure a fair outcome in our trial by jury system

Jury Continuum, Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo

Jury deliberations – how do reasoning skills interplay with decision-making?We may well wonder how the Casey Anthony jury reached its verdict in spite of what many of us thought was a raft of compelling evidence for conviction. In order to understand some of the nuances at play, it is important to understand some of the issues that confront a jury and how the criminal justice system ensures or attempts to ensure a fair outcome in our trial by jury system. At the risk of stating the obvious, one of the most enduring features of our criminal justice system is the …

An Overview Of The Capital Jury Project For Military Practitioners: Aggravation, Mitigation, And Admission Defenses, Eric Carpenter

Eric R. Carpenter

Prosecutorial Ethics, R. Michael Cassidy

R. Michael Cassidy

No abstract provided.

Consideraciones Entorno A La Idea Del Estándar De Convicción En El Proceso Civil / Some Thoughts About The Standard Of Proof In Civil Proceedings, Claudio Fuentes Maureira

Claudio Fuentes Maureira

The paper’s main goal is to present to the Chilean legal community the concept and role of the standard of proof. Chile’s evidentiary system is derived from the Spanish legal tradition and specially the legal regulation of the evidence, in terms of its admissibility but also in terms of its weight. A concept of the standard was not needed until the judicial world start dealing with new evidentiary principles such us the free proof and sound criticism of the evidence.

In general terms the idea of the standard of proof pretends to answer a specific question: How much evidence is …

Proposal To Reverse The View Of A Confession: From Key Evidence Requiring Corroboration To Corroboration For Key Evidence, Boaz Sangero, Mordechai Halpert

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Both case law and legal literature have recognized that all, and not just clearly statistical, evidence is probabilistic. Therefore, we have much to learn from the laws of probability with regard to the evaluation of evidence in a criminal trial. The present Article focuses on the confession. First, we review legal and psychological literature and show that the probability of a false confession and, consequently, a wrongful conviction, is far from insignificant. In light of this, we warn against the cognitive illusion, stemming from the fallacy of the transposed conditional, which is liable to mislead the trier of fact in …

El Derecho De Sucesiones Se Debe Atemperar A Los Cambios De La Sociedad Del Siglo Xxi, Edward Ivan Cueva

Edward Ivan Cueva

No abstract provided.

Simplifying Discovery And Production: Using Easy Frameworks To Evaluate The 2009 Term Of Cases, Eric R. Carpenter

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

An Overview Of The Capital Jury Project For Military Practitioners: Aggravation, Mitigation, And Admission Defenses, Eric R. Carpenter

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Confrontation And Domestic Violence Post-Davis: Is There And Should There Be A Doctrinal Exception, Eleanor Simon

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

Close to five million intimate partner rapes and physical assaults are perpetrated against women in the United States annually. Domestic violence accounts for twenty percent of all non-fatal crime experienced by women in this county. Despite these statistics, many have argued that in the past six years the Supreme Court has "put a target on [the] back" of the domestic violence victim, has "significantly eroded offender accountability in domestic violence prosecutions," and has directly instigated a substantial decline in domestic violence prosecutions. The asserted cause is the Court's complete and groundbreaking re-conceptualization of the Sixth Amendment right of a criminal …

Statistics In Law: Bad Inferences & Uncommon Sense, Curtis E.A. Karnow

Curtis E.A. Karnow

A review of classic fallacies in statistics and probability in the courts. The article briefly, and in plain English, provides an introduction to probability theory, and randomness.

A Defense Attorney’S Guide To Confrontation After Michigan V. Bryant, Kathryn K. Polonsky

Kathryn K Polonsky

In 1603, the Crown charged Sir Walter Raleigh with high treason in part for plotting to murder King James I. In preparing for trial, Lord Cobham, Raleigh’s alleged co-conspirator, was interrogated and signed a sworn confession. During trial, the King used the Crown-procured ex parte testimony of Cobham against Raleigh. Raleigh demanded Cobham be brought before the court so Raleigh might interrogate him “face to face.” Raleigh was sure Cobham would prove his innocence. After all, Cobham had written a letter stating his charges against Raleigh contained no truth.

The Judges refused to allow Raleigh the use of Cobham’s exonerating …

Predators And Propensity: The Proper Approach For Determining The Admissibility Of Prior Bad Acts Evidence In Child Sexual Abuse Prosecutions, Basyle Tchividjian

Basyle Tchividjian

The admissibility of prior bad act evidence in child sexual abuse prosecutions oftentimes makes the difference between a guilty and not guilty verdict. Recently, jurisdictions have growingly embraced the admission of such evidence for the purpose of establishing the defendant’s propensity to sexually victimize children. Due to the potentially high prejudicial effect of admitting propensity evidence, it is more critical than ever that courts carefully apply the decisive evidentiary gatekeeper, the probative value balancing test of Federal Rule of Evidence 403 and its state equivalents. Over the years, courts and legislators have attempted to develop analytical frameworks to be used …

Hanging On By A Thread: The Exclusionary Rule (Or What's Left Of It) Lives For Another Day, David A. Moran

Articles

Back when there was a Soviet Union, foreign intelligence officers would anxiously await the May Day parade in Moscow to see who would be standing next to the chairman of the Communist Party and who would be missing from the reviewing platform altogether. Since the Soviet government and the statecontrolled press published very little about what was really going on in the halls of state power, this was considered the most reliable way to determine who was in or out of favor and, by extension, how the domestic and foreign policies of the world's second most powerful country were likely …

Regulating The Science Of Forensic Evidence: A Broken System Requires A New Federal Agency, Jessica D. Gabel, Ashley D. Champion

Faculty Publications By Year

Professor Gabel and Ms. Champion agree with Mr. Goldstein's argument that serious validity and reliability problems plague forensic science, but, using the recent Troy Davis case in Georgia as an illustration, they argue for federal rather than state oversight. Gabel and Champion assert that many states lack the funding to construct an adequate system and that the fragmentation caused by different state systems would be a significant impediment to reform. They suggest a federal agency that, like the Environmental Protection Agency, would set minimum standards but allow states to experiment with enhanced regulation.

Who Must Testify To The Results Of A Forensic Laboratory Test? Bullcoming V. New Mexico, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

Does the Confrontation Clause permit the prosecution to introduce a forensic laboratory report through the in-court testimony of a supervisor or other person who did not perform or observe the reported test?

The Sky Is Not Falling: How The Anticlimactic Application Of Melendez-Diaz V. Massachusetts To Oklahoma's Laboratory Report Procedures Allows Room For Improvement, Danae Vansickle Grace

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.