Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Evidence Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Evidence

The Unintended Consequences Of California Proposition 47: Reducing Law Enforcement’S Ability To Solve Serious, Violent Crimes, Shelby Kail Aug 2017

The Unintended Consequences Of California Proposition 47: Reducing Law Enforcement’S Ability To Solve Serious, Violent Crimes, Shelby Kail

Pepperdine Law Review

For many years, DNA databases have helped solve countless serious, violent crimes by connecting low-level offenders to unsolved crimes. Because the passage of Proposition 47 reduced several low-level crimes to misdemeanors, which do not qualify for DNA sample collection, Proposition 47 has severely limited law enforcement’s ability to solve serious, violent crimes through California’s DNA database and reliable DNA evidence. This powerful law enforcement tool must be preserved to prevent additional crimes from being committed, to exonerate the innocent, and to provide victims with closure through conviction of their assailants or offenders. Proposition 47’s unintended consequences have led to devastating …


Medical Evidence In Cases Of Intrauterine Drug And Alcohol Exposure , Judith Larsen, Robert M. Horowitz, Ira J. Chasnoff Nov 2012

Medical Evidence In Cases Of Intrauterine Drug And Alcohol Exposure , Judith Larsen, Robert M. Horowitz, Ira J. Chasnoff

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Impact Of Daubert On The Admissibility Of Behavioral Science Testimony, Henry F. Fradella, Adam Fogarty, Lauren O'Neill Apr 2012

The Impact Of Daubert On The Admissibility Of Behavioral Science Testimony, Henry F. Fradella, Adam Fogarty, Lauren O'Neill

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Impact Of Daubert On Forensic Science, Henry F. Fradella, Lauren O'Neill, Adam Fogarty Apr 2012

The Impact Of Daubert On Forensic Science, Henry F. Fradella, Lauren O'Neill, Adam Fogarty

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.


Lawyers Judging Experts: Oversimplifying Science And Undervaluing Advocacy To Construct An Ethical Duty?, David S. Caudill Jan 2012

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

Pepperdine Law Review

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 …