Evidence Commons^™

Full Disclosure: Cognitive Science, Informants, And Search Warrant Scrutiny, Mary Bowman

Mary N. Bowman

Full Disclosure: Cognitive Science, Informants, and Search Warrant Scrutiny

By Mary Nicol Bowman

This article posits that cognitive biases play a significant role in the gap between the rhetoric regarding Fourth Amendment protection and actual practices regarding search warrant scrutiny, particularly for search warrants based on informants’ tips. Specifically, this article examines the ways in which implicit bias, tunnel vision, priming, and hindsight bias can affect search warrants. These biases can affect each stage of the search warrant process, including targeting decisions, the drafting process, the magistrate’s decision whether to grant the warrant, and post-search review by trial and appellate …

Timeless Trial Strategies And Tactics: Lessons From The Classic Claus Von Bülow Case, Daniel M. Braun

Daniel M Braun

In this new Millennium -- an era of increasingly complex cases -- it is critical that lawyers keep a keen eye on trial strategy and tactics. Although scientific evidence today is more sophisticated than ever, the art of effectively engaging people and personalities remains prime. Scientific data must be contextualized and presented in absorbable ways, and attorneys need to ensure not only that they correctly understand jurors, judges, witnesses, and accused persons, but also that they find the means to make their arguments truly resonate if they are to formulate an effective case and ultimately realize justice. A decades-old case …

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 …

Just The Facts: Solving The Corporate Privilege Waiver Dilemma, Don R. Berthiaume

Don R Berthiaume

How can corporations provide “just the facts” — which are, in fact, not privileged — without waiving the attorney client privilege and work product protection? This article argues for an addition to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure based upon Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which allows civil litigants to issue a subpoena to an organization and cause them to “designate one or more officers, directors, or managing agents, or designate other persons who consent to testify on its behalf … about information known or reasonably available to the organization.”[6] Why should we look to Fed. …

Prosecuting Government Fraud Despite The Csi Effect: Getting The Jury To Follow The Money, James B. Johnston

James B Johnston

Prosecutors have complained that jurors who think they are educated in crime scene investigations by watching T.V. have made it difficult to prove cases even when the charge is white collar in nature because they expect the forensics the see on the show "CSI". In regard to government fraud cases, the prosecutor simply must get the jury to follow the fraud linked money. This article notes that those in law enforcement must give the jury what they want to get them to follow the money especially when the case concerns government fraud and corruption.

Drugs, Dogs And The Fourth Amendment: An Analysis Of Justice Stevens' Opinion In Illinois V. Caballes, James Johnston

James B Johnston

When a drug dealer delivers illegal narcotics to the American maret place, he frequently uses out nation's roads. In an opinion authored by Justice John Paul Stevens, the U.S. Supreme Court that is captioned Illinois v. Caballes, the Court ruloed that drug dealers do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy when delivering illegal drugs in their cars. This article agrees with the Court's ruling and argues that we as a society have a right and an obligatio n to protect ourselves from drug abuse and drug traffickers. Justice Stevens' opinionj provides a brilliant examination of judicial precedent coupled with …