Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Non-Physician Vs. Physician: Cross-Disciplinary Expert Testimony In Medical Negligence Litigation, Marc D. Ginsberg
Non-Physician Vs. Physician: Cross-Disciplinary Expert Testimony In Medical Negligence Litigation, Marc D. Ginsberg
Georgia State University Law Review
The source of the applicable standard of care in a specific medical negligence claim is multifaceted. The testifying expert witness, when explaining the applicable standard of care, “would draw upon his own education and practical frame of reference as well as upon relevant medical thinking, as manifested by literature, educational resources and information available to practitioners, and experiences of similarly situated members of the profession.” Accordingly, in typical medical negligence litigation, the plaintiff’s expert witness testifying regarding the existence of and the defendant-physician’s deviation from the standard of care would be a physician. Why, then, have courts permitted non-physicians to …
The Conversational Consent Search: How “Quick Look” And Other Similar Searches Have Eroded Our Constitutional Rights, Alexander A. Mikhalevsky
The Conversational Consent Search: How “Quick Look” And Other Similar Searches Have Eroded Our Constitutional Rights, Alexander A. Mikhalevsky
Georgia State University Law Review
One area in which law enforcement agencies have stretched constitutional limits concerns the scope of a suspect’s consent to search his or her vehicle. Police forces across the country have tested the limits of consent by asking vague, conversational questions to suspects with the goal of obtaining a suspect’s consent to search, even though that individual may not want to allow the search or may not know that he or she has the right to deny consent.
Conversational phrases like “Can I take a quick look?” or “Can I take a quick look around?” have “emerg[ed] as . . . …
Regulating The Science Of Forensic Evidence: A Broken System Requires A New Federal Agency, Jessica D. Gabel, Ashley D. Champion
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.