Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Procedure (91)
- Supreme Court of the United States (57)
- Courts (45)
- Constitutional Law (44)
- Fourth Amendment (27)
-
- Criminal Law (21)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (17)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (16)
- Litigation (15)
- Civil Procedure (13)
- Science and Technology Law (12)
- Law and Society (11)
- Legal Studies (10)
- Forensic Science and Technology (9)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (8)
- Juvenile Law (7)
- Legal History (7)
- Jurisprudence (6)
- Law and Race (6)
- Legal Profession (6)
- Anthropology (5)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (5)
- Medical Jurisprudence (5)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (5)
- Social and Cultural Anthropology (5)
- State and Local Government Law (5)
- Law and Economics (4)
- Race and Ethnicity (4)
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Testimony (60)
- Witnesses (56)
- United States Supreme Court (54)
- Admissibility (49)
- Confrontation Clause (34)
-
- Sixth Amendment (33)
- Cross-examination (32)
- Hearsay (29)
- Police (27)
- Expert evidence (23)
- Crawford v. Washington (21)
- Juries (20)
- Evidence (19)
- Exclusions (19)
- Exclusionary rule (18)
- Reliability (16)
- Probative value (15)
- Searches (15)
- Seizures (15)
- Testimonial (15)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (14)
- Trials (14)
- Confessions (12)
- Custodial interrogations (12)
- Probability (12)
- Mapp v. Ohio (11)
- Miranda v. Arizona (11)
- Voluntary nature (11)
- Children (9)
- Expert witnesses (9)
Articles 181 - 210 of 220
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
'Comparative Reprehensibility' And The Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
'Comparative Reprehensibility' And The Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
Articles
It is not . . . easy to see what the shock-the-conscience test adds, or should be allowed to add, to the deterrent function of exclusionary rules. Where no deterrence of unconstitutional police behavior is possible, a decision to exclude probative evidence with the result that a criminal goes free to prey upon the public should shock the judicial conscience even more than admitting the evidence. So spoke Judge Robert H. Bork, concurring in a ruling that the fourth amendment exclusionary rule does not apply to foreign searches conducted exclusively by foreign officials. A short time thereafter, when an interviewer …
Edward L. Barrett, Jr.: The Critic With 'That Quality Of Judiciousness Demanded Of The Court Itself', Yale Kamisar
Edward L. Barrett, Jr.: The Critic With 'That Quality Of Judiciousness Demanded Of The Court Itself', Yale Kamisar
Articles
Barrett was as talented and as dedicated a law teacher as any of his distinguished (or soon-to-become-distinguished) contemporaries. But Barrett resisted the movement toward new rights in fields where none had existed before. At least, he was quite uneasy about the trend. To be sure, others in law teaching shared Barrett's concern that the clock was spinning too fast. Indeed, some others were quite vociferous about it.' But because his criticism was cerebral rather than emotional - because he fairly stated and fully explored the arguments urging the courts to increase their tempo in developing constitutional rights - Barrett was …
Loss Of Innocence: Eyewitness Identification And Proof Of Guilt, Samuel R. Gross
Loss Of Innocence: Eyewitness Identification And Proof Of Guilt, Samuel R. Gross
Articles
It is no news that eyewitness identification in criminal cases is a problem; it is an old and famous problem. Judges and lawyers have long known that the identification of strangers is a chancy matter, and nearly a century of psychological research has confirmed this skeptical view. In 1967 the Supreme Court attempted to mitigate the problem by regulating the use of eyewitness identification evidence in criminal trials; since then it has retreated part way from that effort. Legal scholars have written a small library of books and articles on this problem, the courts' response to it, and various proposed …
The New Evidence Scholarship: Analyzing The Process Of Proof, Richard O. Lempert
The New Evidence Scholarship: Analyzing The Process Of Proof, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
When I began teaching evidence seventeen years ago, the field was moribund. The great systematizers of the common law-Wigmore, Maguire, McCormick, Morgan and their ilk-had come and, if they had not all already gone, their work was largely finished. Not only was most of what passed for evidence scholarship barely worth the reading-the same, after all, could be said of many fields of law at most times-but disregarding student work, few scholars were writing regularly on evidentiary matters.
Statistics In The Courtroom: Building On Rubinfeld, Richard O. Lempert
Statistics In The Courtroom: Building On Rubinfeld, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
As the use of statistics in litigation has burgeoned and as more complicated statistical techniques have entered the courtroom, concern for the way courts use statistics has mounted and efforts to instruct lawyers and judges on the wise use of statistics have begun. Professor Rubinfeld's paper is a contribution toward this end. Two ideas at the core of this paper are particularly important if we are to develop a more satisfactory approach to the use of statistics in the courtroom. The first is Professor Rubinfeld's caution against the talismanic use of the .05 level of significances as a test of …
Preparation Of The Multistate Bar Examination: One Drafting Committee's Perspective, John W. Reed
Preparation Of The Multistate Bar Examination: One Drafting Committee's Perspective, John W. Reed
Articles
One who wants to know how the Multistate Bar Examination is created should begin by learning how the drafting committees work. My assignment is to describe the work of one of those committees: the Evidence Committee. Though there are differences among the six committees, they mostly are ones of style, and to learn how to operate in the evidence group is to understand the process generally.
Recognition, Use Of Force, And The Legal Effect Of United Nations Resolutions Under The Revised Restatement Of The Foreign Relations Law Of The United States, Malvina Halberstam
Recognition, Use Of Force, And The Legal Effect Of United Nations Resolutions Under The Revised Restatement Of The Foreign Relations Law Of The United States, Malvina Halberstam
Articles
No abstract provided.
Introduction: Trends And Developments With Respect To That Amendment 'Central To Enjoyment Of Other Guarantees Of The Bill Of Rights', Yale Kamisar
Articles
Seventy years ago, in the famous Weeks case,' the Supreme Court evoked a storm of controversy by promulgating the federal exclusionary rule. When, a half-century later, in the landmark Mapp case,2 the Court extended the Weeks rule to state criminal proceedings, at least one experienced observer assumed that the controversy "today finds its end." 3 But as we all know now, Mapp only intensified the controversy. Indeed, in recent years spirited debates over proposals to modify the exclusionary rule or to scrap it entirely have filled the air - and the law reviews.'
Gates, 'Probable Cause', 'Good Faith', And Beyond, Yale Kamisar
Gates, 'Probable Cause', 'Good Faith', And Beyond, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Illinois v. Gates1 was the most eagerly awaited constitutional-criminal procedure case of the 1982 Term. I think it fair to say, however, that it was awaited a good deal more eagerly by law enforcement officials and the Americans for Effective Law Enforcement than by defense lawyers and the American Civil Liberties Union. As it turned out, of course, the Gates Court, to the disappointment of many, did not reach the question whether the exclusionary rule in search and seizure cases should be modified so as not to require the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of the fourth amendment when …
Does (Did) (Should) The Exclusionary Rule Rest On A 'Principled Basis' Rather Than An 'Empirical Proposition'?, Yale Kamisar
Does (Did) (Should) The Exclusionary Rule Rest On A 'Principled Basis' Rather Than An 'Empirical Proposition'?, Yale Kamisar
Articles
[U]ntil the [exclusionary rule] rests on a principled basis rather than an empirical proposition, [the rule] will remain in a state of unstable equilibrium. Mapp v. Ohio, which overruled the then twelve-year-old Wolf case and imposed the fourth amendment exclusionary rule (the Weeks doctrine) on the states as a matter of fourteenth amendment due process, seemed to mark the end of an era. Concurring in Mapp, Justice Douglas recalled that Wolf had evoked "a storm of constitutional controversy which only today finds its end."' But in the two decades since Justice Douglas made this observation, the storm of controversy has …
Testimonial Immunity And The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination: A Study In Isomorphism, Peter Lushing
Testimonial Immunity And The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination: A Study In Isomorphism, Peter Lushing
Articles
This Article accepts and will develop the Court's isomorphic theory of immunity and privilege, and will show why Portash is nonetheless correct in result. A case for a broadened view of the privilege, partially because of the availability of testimonial immunity, will be made. Apftlbaum will be shown to be incorrect in result. This Article will also analyze the problem of immunized testimony and perjury by inconsistent statement, a problem faced once by the Court but left unresolved. Finally, this Article will discuss the constitutional requirements of an immunity statute, and consider an immunity case presently pending before the Supreme …
Search And Seizure Of America: The Case For Keeping The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
Search And Seizure Of America: The Case For Keeping The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Twenty years ago, concurring in Mapp v. Ohio (1961), Justice William 0. Douglas looked back on Wolf v. Colorado (1949) (which had held that the Fourth Amendment's substantive protection against "unreasonable search and seizure" was binding on the states through the due process clause, but that the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule was not) and recalled that the Wolf case had evoked "a storm of controversy which only today finds its end." But, of course, in the twenty years since Justice Douglas made that observation the storm of controversy has only intensified, and it has engulfed the exclusionary rule in federal …
How We Got The Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule And Why We Need It, Yale Kamisar
How We Got The Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule And Why We Need It, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Why the continuing storm of controversy over the exclusionary rule? Why the deep and widespread hostility to it? I think a recent law office search case, because it arose in a setting so unlike the typical search and seizure case, furnishes a clue. In O'Connor v. Johnson, St. Paul police obtained a warrant to search an attorney's office for business records of a client suspected of making false written statements in applying for a liquor license. The attorney happened to be present when the police arrived. Holding on to his work product file, which contained some of the records sought, …
A Right To Every Woman's Evidence, Richard O. Lempert
A Right To Every Woman's Evidence, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
I am indeed honored to be here with you today, honored to be joining you next year as Iowa's first Mason Ladd Visiting Distinguished Professor of Law, and honored to be giving the first Mason Ladd Lecture. The honor lies not just in the recognition you accord me, but also in the linkage to the man in whose name this recognition is given.
Faces Without Features: The Surface Validity Of Criminal Inferences, Peter Lushing
Faces Without Features: The Surface Validity Of Criminal Inferences, Peter Lushing
Articles
This article will offer nonempirical grounds to show that instructed inferences operate as the dissenters believe, at least when the instruction does not explicitly refer to the evidence at trial, but to occurrences in general.
Exclusionary Rule: Reasonable Remarks On Unreasonable Search And Seizure, Yale Kamisar
Exclusionary Rule: Reasonable Remarks On Unreasonable Search And Seizure, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Can we live with the so-called exclusionary rule, which bars the use of illegally gained evidence in criminal trials? Can the Fourth Amendment live without it? A growing number of lawyers and judges, including Chief Justice Warren Burger, have called for abandonment of the rule, usually on the ground that it has not prevented illegal searches and seizures and on the ground that the rule has contributed significantly to the increase in crime. No one has convincingly demonstrated a causal link between the high rate of crime in America and the exclusionary rule, and I do not believe that any …
A Defense Of The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
A Defense Of The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
Articles
The exclusionary rule is being flayed with increasing vigor by a number of unrelated sources and with a variety of arguments. Some critics find it unworkable and resort to empirically based arguments. Others see it as the product of a belated and unwarranted judicial interpretation. Still others, uncertain whether the rule works, are confident that in some fashion law enforcement's hands are tied. Professor Yale Kamisar, long a defender of the exclusionary rule, reviews the current attacks on the rule and offers a vigorous rebuttal. He finds it difficult to accept that there is a line for acceptable police conduct …
The Exclusionary Rule In Historical Perspective: The Struggle To Make The Fourth Amendment More Than 'An Empty Blessing', Yale Kamisar
The Exclusionary Rule In Historical Perspective: The Struggle To Make The Fourth Amendment More Than 'An Empty Blessing', Yale Kamisar
Articles
In the 65 years since the Supreme Court adopted the exclusionary rule, few critics have attacked it with as much vigor and on as many fronts as did Judge Malcolm Wilkey in his recent Judicature article, "The exclusionary rule: why suppress valid evidence?" (November 1978).
The Federal Rules Of Evidence: A Model For Improved Evidentiary Decisionmaking In Washington, Robert H. Aronson
The Federal Rules Of Evidence: A Model For Improved Evidentiary Decisionmaking In Washington, Robert H. Aronson
Articles
This article discusses the underlying reasons for establishing rules of evidence, defines two unavoidable conflicts encountered in attempting to effectuate the purposes for adopting such rules, suggests that the Federal Rules of Evidence help resolve these conflicts by adhering to several clearly enunciated rationales, and, finally, indicates how the Rules recognize and accommodate important new scientific and social insights on the admissibility of evidence.
Is The Exclusionary Rule An 'Illogical' Or 'Unnatural' Interpretation Of The Fourth Amendment?, Yale Kamisar
Is The Exclusionary Rule An 'Illogical' Or 'Unnatural' Interpretation Of The Fourth Amendment?, Yale Kamisar
Articles
More than 50 years have passed since the Supreme Court decided the Weeks case, barring the use in federal prosecutions of evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and the Silverthorne case, invoking what has come to be known as the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine. The justices who decided those cases would, I think, be quite surprised to learn that some day the value of the exclusionary rule would be measured by-and the very life of the rule might depend on-an empirical evaluation of its efficacy in deterring police misconduct. These justices were engaged in a less …
Foreword: Brewer V. Williams--A Hard Look At A Discomfiting Record, Yale Kamisar
Foreword: Brewer V. Williams--A Hard Look At A Discomfiting Record, Yale Kamisar
Articles
In recent decades, few matters have split the Supreme Court, troubled the legal profession, and agitated the public as much as the police interrogation-confession cases. The recent case of Brewer v. Williams3 is as provocative as any, because the Supreme Court there revdrsed the defendant's conviction for the "savage murder of a small child" even though no Justice denied his guilt,4 he was warned of his rights no fewer than five times, 5 and any "interrogation" that might have occurred seemed quite mild.6
A Review Of The Proposed Michigan Rules Of Evidence, James K. Robinson, John W. Reed
A Review Of The Proposed Michigan Rules Of Evidence, James K. Robinson, John W. Reed
Articles
On January 6, 1977, the Supreme Court of Michigan entered an order stating that it is considering adoption of the proposed Michigan Rules of Evidence which were submitted to the Court by the committee which it appointed in March 1975. The Court has solicited comments from interested persons regarding the proposed rules. A copy of the Supreme Court's order is published in this issue of the Bar Journal. The proposed rules are published in the January 26, 1977, issue of North Western Reporter, Second Series (Michigan Edition). The purpose of this article is to review in general the background and …
Search And Seizure In Alaska: A Comprehensive Review, Jeff M. Feldman
Search And Seizure In Alaska: A Comprehensive Review, Jeff M. Feldman
Articles
In the eighteen years since Alaska achieved statehood, fifty-two cases involving issues of search and seizure have reached the Alaska Supreme Court. This article will analyze these cases with an eyetowards outlining the law of search and seizure in Alaska, isolating those areas in which the Alaska Supreme Court has departed from prevailing search and seizure doctrine, and using past decisions to predict the probable outcomes to search and seizure issues still unresolved in Alaska.
Bad News And Good News, John W. Reed
Bad News And Good News, John W. Reed
Articles
I have been asked to visit with you about some of my current interests in the evidence field, in which I teach. When you invite an academic lawyer to speak at your meeting, you obviously expect of him something other than the latest hot tips on trial strategy and tactics, something other than a speech entitled "Reflections on My Last Eleven Victories in Court." Others can do that for you, probably at lunch - or, even better, at cocktails with the successes more impressive and the defeats more forgivable under the influence of an ounce or two of alcohol.
The Citizen On Trial: The New Confession Rules, Yale Kamisar
The Citizen On Trial: The New Confession Rules, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Commenting on why it has taken the United States so long to apply "the privilege against self-incrimination and the right to counsel to the proceedings in the stationhouse as well as to those in the courtroom" - as the Supreme Court did in Miranda v. Arizona - this author notes that, "To a large extent this is so because here, as elsewhere, there has been a wide gap between the principles to which we aspire and the practices we actually employ."
What Is This Thing Called Hearsay?, John W. Reed
What Is This Thing Called Hearsay?, John W. Reed
Articles
This article is based on an address delivered at the 1956 Advocacy Institute at the University of Michigan. A re-examination of elementary principles, the discussion proceeds on the express assumption that much of the uncertainty and confusion in usa of the hearsay rule is unnecessary because it is due to failure to recall and employ these principles.
Evidence - Disputable Presumptions; Can They Be Weighed?, Victor H. Lane
Evidence - Disputable Presumptions; Can They Be Weighed?, Victor H. Lane
Articles
The evidential force of presumptions under the California Civil Code, I96I, was considered and the statute construed in Everett v. Stazdard Accident Insurance Co., - Cal. - , 187 Pac. 996. The defense to an action on an insurance policy, by one claiming to be the wife of the insured, was that she did not have that relationship because the marriage ceremony under which she claimed occurred while the insured had another wife then living. The question arose as to the effect upon the determination of this question of fact of the presumption that the deceased did not commit a …
Deeds Delivered Conditionally To The Grantee, Ralph W. Aigler
Deeds Delivered Conditionally To The Grantee, Ralph W. Aigler
Articles
Generally courts have shown a commendable disposition to get away from the formalism, which in the past played such a large part in determination of questions of delivery. While the actual tradition of the instrument to the grantee or to someone on his behalf, on the one hand, or its retention in the hands of the maker, on the other, is still very important evidentially, such facts are not by any means controlling. Thus it is entirely possible for a deed to be delivered though it never has been out of the grantor's hands; likewise a deed may be undelivered …
Privileged Communication Between Attorney And Client-Question Of Whether The Relation Exists Left To Jury-Party Allowed To Assign Error On Ruling Violating The Privilege, Victor H. Lane
Articles
This procedure was justified in the opinion in State v. Snook (Court of Errors and "Appeals of N. J., 1920), 109 Atl. 289. Snook was on trial for manslaughter charged as having been committed by the reckless driving of an automobile. After the act, Mimmick, one of the persons in the automobile, and afterward a witness for the defense, went to an attorney and had some conversation with him, the substance of which, as testified to by the attorney, was a recital by M. of what had occurred and an inquiry by him of the attorney as to what he …
The Scintilla Rule Of Evidence, Edson R. Sunderland
The Scintilla Rule Of Evidence, Edson R. Sunderland
Articles
In analyzing the reasons why "trial by jury has declined to such an extent that it has come in many cases to be an avowed maxim of professional action,--a good case is for the court; a bad case is for the jury,"-JUDGE DILLON, in his LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE, pp. 130-2, credits "the false principle known as the scintilla doctrine" with a large degree of responsibility.