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

Evidence Commons

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

Faculty Scholarship

Discipline
Institution
Keyword
Publication Year

Articles 1 - 30 of 194

Full-Text Articles in Evidence

The Disappointing History Of Science In The Courtroom: Frye, Daubert, And The Ongoing Crisis Of “Junk Science” In Criminal Trials, Jim Hilbert Jan 2019

The Disappointing History Of Science In The Courtroom: Frye, Daubert, And The Ongoing Crisis Of “Junk Science” In Criminal Trials, Jim Hilbert

Faculty Scholarship

Twenty-five years ago, the Supreme Court decided one of the most important cases concerning the use of science in courtrooms. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals , the Court addressed widespread concerns that courts were admitting unreliable scientific evidence. In addition, lower courts lacked clarity on the status of the previous landmark case for courtroom science, Frye v. United States. In the years leading up to the Daubert decision, policy-makers and legal observers sounded the alarm about the rise in the use of "junk science" by so-called expert witnesses. Some critics went so far as to suggest that American businesses and ...


Leveling Felony Charges For Withholding Evidence, Jodi Nagzger Jan 2018

Leveling Felony Charges For Withholding Evidence, Jodi Nagzger

Faculty Scholarship

This Article addresses the intersection of the rule of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 3.8. Brady requires prosecutors to automatically disclose materially exculpatory evidence in the government’s possession to the defense. ABA Model Rule 3.8 requires a prosecutor in a criminal case “to make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense.” The ABA issued a formal opinion in 2009 which concluded that the prosecutor’s ethical duty ...


Honesty Without Truth: Lies, Accuracy, And The Criminal Justice Process, Lisa Kern Griffin Jan 2018

Honesty Without Truth: Lies, Accuracy, And The Criminal Justice Process, Lisa Kern Griffin

Faculty Scholarship

Focusing on “lying” is a natural response to uncertainty but too narrow of a concern. Honesty and truth are not the same thing and conflating them can actually inhibit accuracy. In several settings across investigations and trials, the criminal justice system elevates compliant statements, misguided beliefs, and confident opinions while excluding more complex evidence. Error often results. Some interrogation techniques, for example, privilege cooperation over information. Those interactions can yield incomplete or false statements, confessions, and even guilty pleas. Because of the impeachment rules that purportedly prevent perjury, the most knowledgeable witnesses may be precluded from taking the stand. The ...


Mandating Meaningful Forensic Discovery: A Proposal To Fuel The Engine Of Truthfulness, Marjorie Mcdiarmid Jan 2018

Mandating Meaningful Forensic Discovery: A Proposal To Fuel The Engine Of Truthfulness, Marjorie Mcdiarmid

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Introduction: Symposium On “Forensics, Statistics, And Law”, Brandon L. Garrett Jan 2018

Introduction: Symposium On “Forensics, Statistics, And Law”, Brandon L. Garrett

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


An Evidentiary Oddity: “Careful Habit” – Does The Law Of Evidence Embrace This Archaic/Modern Concept?, 43 Ohio N.U. L. Rev. 293 (2017), Marc Ginsberg Jan 2017

An Evidentiary Oddity: “Careful Habit” – Does The Law Of Evidence Embrace This Archaic/Modern Concept?, 43 Ohio N.U. L. Rev. 293 (2017), Marc Ginsberg

Faculty Scholarship

The concept of the “careful habit”[i] is intriguing. The law of evidence vigorously distinguishes between character evidence (largely inadmissible)[ii] and habit evidence (presumptively admissible).[iii] Character is understood as a propensity to act in a certain fashion[iv]—a person’s disposition. Habit is understood as non-volitional, repetitive specific conduct, in response to stimuli, over a rather lengthy period of time.[v] “Carefulness” is known by the law as a character trait.[vi] Carefulness should not be confused with habit, yet this confusion has occurred in multiple jurisdictions, many years ago and recently. This paper seeks to explore ...


Using Prior Consistent Statements To Rehabilitate Credibility Or To Prove Substantive Assertions Before And After The 2014 Amendment Of Federal Rule Of Evidence 801(D)(1)(B), Floralynn Einesman Jan 2017

Using Prior Consistent Statements To Rehabilitate Credibility Or To Prove Substantive Assertions Before And After The 2014 Amendment Of Federal Rule Of Evidence 801(D)(1)(B), Floralynn Einesman

Faculty Scholarship

The Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) expanded the non-hearsay category of admissible prior consistent statements with FRE 801(d)(1)(B)(ii) to include any statements counsel uses to rehabilitate a declarant’s credibility after that credibility has been attacked. FREV 801(d)(1)(B)(i) and (ii) require that a declarant testify and be subjected to cross-examination about the prior consistent statement. Under these rules, the time at which the declarant made the consistent statement and her reason for making it are critical.

When the declarant does not testify, however, under FRE 806 opposing counsel may still attack the ...


The Fragile Promise Of Open-File Discovery, Ben Grunwald Jan 2017

The Fragile Promise Of Open-File Discovery, Ben Grunwald

Faculty Scholarship

Under traditional rules of criminal discovery, defendants are entitled to little prosecutorial evidence and are thus forced to negotiate plea agreements and prepare for trial in the dark. In an effort to expand defendants’ discovery rights, a number of states have recently enacted “open-file” statutes, which require the government to share the fruits of its investigation with the defense. Legal scholars have widely supported these reforms, claiming that they level the playing field and promote judicial efficiency by decreasing trials and speeding up guilty pleas. But these predictions are based largely on intuition and anecdotal data without extended theoretical analysis ...


Breaking Bad Facts: How Intriguing Contradictions In Fiction Can Teach Lawyers To Re-Envision Harmful Evidence, Cathren Koehlert-Page Oct 2016

Breaking Bad Facts: How Intriguing Contradictions In Fiction Can Teach Lawyers To Re-Envision Harmful Evidence, Cathren Koehlert-Page

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Precedent In Statutory Interpretation, Lawrence Solan May 2016

Precedent In Statutory Interpretation, Lawrence Solan

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Copwatching, Jocelyn Simonson Apr 2016

Copwatching, Jocelyn Simonson

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


From Simple Statements To Heartbreaking Photographs And Videos: An Interdisciplinary Examination Of Victim Impact Evidence In Criminal Cases, Mitchell J. Frank Jan 2016

From Simple Statements To Heartbreaking Photographs And Videos: An Interdisciplinary Examination Of Victim Impact Evidence In Criminal Cases, Mitchell J. Frank

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Miranda'S Truth: The Importance Of Adversarial Testing And Dignity In Confession Law, Meghan J. Ryan Jan 2016

Miranda'S Truth: The Importance Of Adversarial Testing And Dignity In Confession Law, Meghan J. Ryan

Faculty Scholarship

The landmark decision of Miranda v. Arizona focuses on the important values of adversarial testing and human dignity. These values can be found among a constellation of values ordinarily aligned with constitutional criminal procedure cases like Miranda. The constellation also includes values such as truth-finding and equality. With the regularization of DNA analysis and the realization that a large number of innocent people have been convicted, however, there has been a recent fixation on truth-finding. Other values have been overshadowed. The myopic pursuit of truth-finding may be somewhat misguided, as certainty of truth is generally impossible. This is recognized by ...


Confrontation As A Rule Of Production, Pamela R. Metzger Jan 2016

Confrontation As A Rule Of Production, Pamela R. Metzger

Faculty Scholarship

The Confrontation Clause is cost blind; the Supreme Court is not. In 2004, in Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court trumpeted its commitment to a procedural Confrontation Clause that required the prosecution to produce its witnesses in court, regardless of the cost or inconvenience. In 2007, in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, the Court retreated, offering courts, legislatures, and prosecutors an easy way to avoid Confrontation-laden trials. On the one hand, the Court warned that legislatures and courts could not “suspend the Confrontation Clause,” even if there were “other ways — and in some cases better ways — to challenge or verify” the prosecution ...


Evidence Laundering In A Post-Herring World, Kay L. Levine, Jenia I. Turner, Ronald F. Wright Jan 2016

Evidence Laundering In A Post-Herring World, Kay L. Levine, Jenia I. Turner, Ronald F. Wright

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s decision in Herring v. United States authorizes police to defeat the Fourth Amendment’s protections through a process we call evidence laundering. Evidence laundering occurs when one police officer makes a constitutional mistake when gathering evidence and then passes that evidence along to a second officer, who develops it further and then delivers it to prosecutors for use in a criminal case. When courts admit the evidence based on the good faith of the second officer, the original constitutional taint disappears in the wash.

In the years since Herring was decided, courts have allowed evidence laundering ...


Two Models Of Pre-Plea Discovery In Criminal Cases: An Empirical Comparison, Jenia I. Turner, Allison D. Redlich Jan 2016

Two Models Of Pre-Plea Discovery In Criminal Cases: An Empirical Comparison, Jenia I. Turner, Allison D. Redlich

Faculty Scholarship

Our criminal justice system resolves most of its cases through plea bargains. Yet the U.S. Supreme Court has not required that any evidence, even exculpatory or impeachment evidence, be provided to the defense before a guilty plea. As a result, state rules on pre-plea discovery differ widely. While some jurisdictions follow an “open-file” model, imposing relatively broad discovery obligations on prosecutors early in the criminal process, others follow a more restrictive, “closed-file” model and allow the prosecution to avoid production of critical evidence either entirely or until very near the time of trial. Though the advantages and disadvantages of ...


Criminal Adjudication, Error Correction, And Hindsight Blind Spots, Lisa Kern Griffin Jan 2016

Criminal Adjudication, Error Correction, And Hindsight Blind Spots, Lisa Kern Griffin

Faculty Scholarship

Concerns about hindsight in the law typically arise with regard to the bias that outcome knowledge can produce. But a more difficult problem than the clear view that hindsight appears to provide is the blind spot that it actually has. Because of the conventional wisdom about error review, there is a missed opportunity to ensure meaningful scrutiny. Beyond the confirmation biases that make convictions seem inevitable lies the question whether courts can see what they are meant to assess when they do look closely for error. Standards that require a retrospective showing of materiality, prejudice, or harm turn on what ...


Dna And Distrust, Kerry Abrams, Brandon L. Garrett Jan 2016

Dna And Distrust, Kerry Abrams, Brandon L. Garrett

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past three decades, government regulation and funding of DNA testing has reshaped the use of genetic evidence across various fields, including criminal law, family law, and employment law. Courts have struggled with questions of when and whether to treat genetic evidence as implicating individual rights, policy trade-offs, or federalism problems. We identify two modes of genetic testing: identification testing, used to establish a person’s identity, and predictive testing, which seeks to predict outcomes for a person. Judges and lawmakers have often drawn a bright line at predictive testing, while allowing uninhibited identity testing. The U.S. Supreme ...


Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Darryl K. Brown, Robert P. Burns, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar, Jessica L. West Jan 2016

Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Darryl K. Brown, Robert P. Burns, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar, Jessica L. West

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


The New Doctrinalism: Implications For Evidence Theory, Alex Stein Jun 2015

The New Doctrinalism: Implications For Evidence Theory, Alex Stein

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Tell Us A Story But Don’T Make It A Good One: Embracing The Tension Regarding Emotional Stories And The Federal Rule Of Evidence 403, Cathren Koehlert-Page Jan 2015

Tell Us A Story But Don’T Make It A Good One: Embracing The Tension Regarding Emotional Stories And The Federal Rule Of Evidence 403, Cathren Koehlert-Page

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Imaging Brains, Changing Minds: How Pain Neuroimaging Can Inform The Law, Amanda C. Pustilnik Jan 2015

Imaging Brains, Changing Minds: How Pain Neuroimaging Can Inform The Law, Amanda C. Pustilnik

Faculty Scholarship

What would the law do differently if it could see into the black box of the mind? One of the most valuable things it might do is reform the ways it deals with pain. Pain is ubiquitous in law, from tort to torture, from ERISA to expert evidence. Yet legal doctrines grapple with pain poorly, embodying concepts that are generations out of date and that cast suspicion on pain sufferers as having a problem that is “all in their heads.”

Now, brain-imaging technologies are allowing scientists to see the brain in pain—and to reconceive of many types of pain ...


Why Illinois Should Adopt Federal Rule Of Evidence 803(18) To Allow The Learned Treatise Exception To The Hearsay Rule, 39 S. Ill. U. L.J. 275 (2015), Ralph Ruebner, Katarina Durcova, Amy Taylor Jan 2015

Why Illinois Should Adopt Federal Rule Of Evidence 803(18) To Allow The Learned Treatise Exception To The Hearsay Rule, 39 S. Ill. U. L.J. 275 (2015), Ralph Ruebner, Katarina Durcova, Amy Taylor

Faculty Scholarship

Illinois still adheres to a rigid and outdated common law principle that treats a learned treatise as hearsay. This principle stands at odds with the adoption of Federal Rules of Evidence 703 ("FRE 703")' and 705 ("FRE 705") by the Illinois Supreme Court. Illinois courts have developed clever ways to get around the common law prohibition thereby creating an incoherent and inconsistent jurisprudence that at times yields bizarre outcomes.

Adopting the federal learned treatise exception to the hearsay rule would set out a consistent standard in Illinois for admitting learned treatises and allowing them as substantive evidence. Now that Illinois ...


The Promises And Pitfalls Of State Eyewitness Identification Reforms, Nicholas A. Kahn-Fogel Jan 2015

The Promises And Pitfalls Of State Eyewitness Identification Reforms, Nicholas A. Kahn-Fogel

Faculty Scholarship

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of state-based eyewitness identification reforms, including legislative directives, evidentiary rules, and judicial interpretations of state constitutions as providing greater protection against the use of unreliable eyewitness evidence than the United State Supreme Court offered in its 1977 decision in Manson v. Brathwaite. While previous scholarship has included thorough consideration of a single state's eyewitness law, state-by-state analysis of a sub-issue in eyewitness law, and brief general surveys of state approaches to eyewitness reform, this article adds to the current body of scholarship with an in-depth evaluation of eyewitness identification law in states that ...


Exporting The Hearsay Provisions Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence,, Roger C. Park Jan 2015

Exporting The Hearsay Provisions Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence,, Roger C. Park

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Inefficient Evidence, Alex Stein Jan 2015

Inefficient Evidence, Alex Stein

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Electronically Stored Information And The Ancient Documents Exception To The Hearsay Rule: Fix It Before People Find Out About It, Daniel J. Capra Jan 2015

Electronically Stored Information And The Ancient Documents Exception To The Hearsay Rule: Fix It Before People Find Out About It, Daniel J. Capra

Faculty Scholarship

The first website on the Internet was posted in 1991. While there is not much factual content on the earliest websites, it did not take long for factual assertions—easily retrievable today—to flood the Internet. Now, over one hundred billion emails are sent, and ten million static web pages are added to the Internet every day. In 2006 alone, the world produced electronic information that was equal to three million times the amount of information stored in every book ever written. The earliest innovations in electronic communication are now over twenty years old—meaning that the factual assertions made ...


Decision-Making In The Dark: How Pre-Trial Errors Change The Narrative In Criminal Jury Trials, Kara Mackillop, Neil Vidmar Jan 2015

Decision-Making In The Dark: How Pre-Trial Errors Change The Narrative In Criminal Jury Trials, Kara Mackillop, Neil Vidmar

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past decade and a half, a great deal of attention has rightfully been given to the issue of wrongful convictions. In 2003, Jim Dwyer, Peter Neufeld and Barry Scheck published Actual Innocence, an eyeopening treatise on the reality of wrongful convictions in the United States. In the years since, more than 1400 innocent persons have been exonerated, and a very diverse research community of attorneys, academics, social scientists, and activists has developed in response to the realization offlaws in our criminal justice system. In 2012, Brandon Garrett's Convicting the Innocent quantitatively evaluated the first 250 DNA exonerations ...


Wrongful Convictions And Upstream Reform In The Criminal Justice System, Kate Kruse Jan 2015

Wrongful Convictions And Upstream Reform In The Criminal Justice System, Kate Kruse

Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores the viability of upstream criminal justice reforms within the context of an adversary and procedural system of criminal justice, focusing on reforms in eyewitness identification procedures. Mistaken eyewitness identification evidence is often cited as the leading cause of wrongful convictions in the United States. Eyewitness identification reforms have also been the most developed upstream efforts to grow out of the innocence movement. The success and limitation of upstream reform in eyewitness identification shed light on the efficacy of upstream criminal justice system reform more generally, as well as in areas that are less developed, such as the ...


Painful Disparities, Painful Realities, Amanda C. Pustilnik Mar 2014

Painful Disparities, Painful Realities, Amanda C. Pustilnik

Faculty Scholarship

Legal doctrines and decisional norms treat chronic claims pain differently than other kinds of disability or damages claims because of bias and confusion about whether chronic pain is real. This is law’s painful disparity. Now, breakthrough neuroimaging can make pain visible, shedding light on these mysterious ills. Neuroimaging shows these conditions are, as sufferers have known all along, painfully real. This Article is about where law ought to change because of innovations in structural and functional imaging of the brain in pain. It describes cutting-edge scientific developments and the impact they should make on evidence law and disability law ...