Evidence Commons^™

The Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege, Michael L. Orenstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Tale Of Two (And Possibly Three) Atkins: Intellectual Disability And Capital Punishment Twelve Years After The Supreme Court’S Creation Of A Categorical Bar, John H. Blume, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Paul Marcus, Emily Paavola

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Scientizing Culpability: The Implications Of Hall V. Florida And The Possibility Of A “Scientific Stare Decisis”, Christopher Slobogin

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Supreme Court’s decision in Hall v. Florida held that “clinical definitions” control the meaning of intellectual disability in the death penalty context. In other words, Hall “scientized” the definition of a legal concept. This Article discusses the implications of this unprecedented move. It also introduces the idea of scientific stare decisis—a requirement that groups that are scientifically alike be treated similarly for culpability purposes—as a means of implementing the scientization process.

The Daryl Atkins Story, Mark E. Olive

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The True Legacy Of Atkins And Roper: The Unreliability Principle, Mentally Ill Defendants, And The Death Penalty’S Unraveling, Scott E. Sundby

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In striking down the death penalty for intellectually disabled and juvenile defendants, Atkins v. Virginia and Roper v. Simmons have been understandably heralded as important holdings under the Court’s Eighth Amendment jurisprudence that has found the death penalty “disproportional” for certain types of defendants and crimes. This Article argues, however, that the cases have a far more revolutionary reach than their conventional understanding. In both cases the Court went one step beyond its usual two-step analysis of assessing whether imposing the death penalty violated “evolving standards of decency.” This extra step looked at why even though intellectual disability and youth …

Hall V. Florida: The Supreme Court’S Guidance In Implementing Atkins, James W. Ellis

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Does Atkins Make A Difference In Non-Capital Cases? Should It?, Paul Marcus

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Challenges Of Conveying Intellectual Disabilities To Judge And Jury, Caroline Everington

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court's Analysis Of Issues Raised By Death Penalty Litigants In The Court's 2004 Term, Richard Klein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Say Sorry And Save: A Practical Argument For A Greater Role For Apologies In Medical Malpractice Law, Matthew Pillsbury

University of Massachusetts Law Review

This article examines both the potential benefits and detriments of the use of an apology in a legal setting. This article uses the specific environment surrounding a medical malpractice case to help illustrate how and why an apology should or should not be proffered by the Defendant. Ultimately, the reader of this article should have a solid understanding of how an apology can be admissible as evidence in the litigation of a medical malpractice lawsuit.

Strengths, Limitations, And Controversies Of Dna Evidence, Naseam Rachel Behrouzfard

University of Massachusetts Law Review

This article explores the benefits of DNA evidence as well as the evidentiary problems associated with DNA. Part II discusses the history, development, and the emergence of DNA in the criminal justice system. Part III analyzes the significance of DNA evidence and its impact on recent cases. Part IV describes the disadvantages of DNA evidence in terms of efficiency, risks, human error, and its impact on jurors.

Dna In The Courtroom: The 21st Century Begins, James T. Griffith, Susan L. Leclair

University of Massachusetts Law Review

DNA is one of the most significant discoveries in the field of forensic evidence yet it remains underutilized in the courtroom setting. This article provides an introduction to the scientific principles, structure and composition of DNA in an effort to make DNA more accessible to the judicial process.

Lessons Learned From 9/11: Dna Identification In Mass Fatality Incidents, National Institute Of Justice

University of Massachusetts Law Review

DNA analysis is the gold standard for identification of human remains from mass disasters. Particularly in the absence of traditional anthropological and other physical characteristics, forensic DNA typing allows for identification of any biological sample and the association of body parts, as long as sufficient DNA can be recovered from the samples. This is true even when the victim’s remains are fragmented and the DNA is degraded. While many effective laboratory protocols are available for DNA analysis, the analytical portion is only one part of the identification process.

Introduction To Excerpts From Lessons Learned From 9/11: Dna Identification In Mass Fatality Incidents, Glenn R. Schmitt

University of Massachusetts Law Review

On the 5th anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, the National Institute of Justice – the research, development, and evaluation agency of the U.S. Department of Justice – published a major report on the identification of mass disaster victims using DNA analysis. The report was prepared by the Kinship and Data Analysis Panel, a multidisciplinary group of scientists assembled by the National Institute of Justice to offer guidance to the New York City Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in the identification of those who perished in the World Trade Center.

Introduction, Miriam F. Miquelon-Weismann

University of Massachusetts Law Review

Legal educators increasingly use the classroom to import expertise from scientists and social scientists to better prepare law students to engage in specialized and collaborative fields of practice. Indeed, this project grew out of a paper course on Scientific Evidence in Civil and Criminal Cases offered during the spring 2006 semester at the law school. Students heard from accident reconstruction experts, DNA scientists, forensic pathologist and medical malpractice experts. In February 2006, Dr. Aaron Lazare, Dean and Chancellor at the University of Massachusetts, addressed the law school on a cutting-edge legal theory from his recently published book, “On Apology.” Stimulated …

Contents May Have Shifted: Disentangling The Best Evidence Rule From The Rule Against Hearsay, Colin Miller

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

The rule against hearsay covers a statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted but does not cover a statement offered for another purpose. Meanwhile, the Best Evidence Rule states that a party seeking to prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph must produce the original or account for its nonproduction. Does this mean that the Rule is inapplicable when a party seeks to prove something other than the truth of the matter asserted in a writing, recording or photograph? Most courts have answered this question in the affirmative. This essay argues these courts are wrong.

Snap And Destroy: Preservation Issues For Ephemeral Communications, Ryan G. Ganzenmuller

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Symposium On The Challenges Of Electronic Evidence, Panel Discussion

Fordham Law Review

The Phillip D. Reed Lecture Series: Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules

The Case For Ehearsay, Jeffrey Bellin

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Memorandum: Hearsay Exception For Electronic Communications Of Recent Perception, Daniel J. Capra

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Architects Of Justice: The Prosecutor’S Role And Resolving Whether Inadmissible Evidence Is Material Under The Brady Rule, Blaise Niosi

Fordham Law Review

In Brady v. Maryland, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the prosecution has a constitutional duty to disclose evidence favorable to the defendant’s guilt or punishment upon request. The Court’s subsequent expansion of its holding in Brady has formed the “Brady rule,” which requires the prosecution to learn of and to disclose to the defendant all material exculpatory and impeachment information. The Court defined “material” as information that would cause a reasonable probability of a different trial outcome had it been disclosed.

Currently, a circuit court split exists regarding whether evidence is material for purposes of the Brady …

The Court As Gatekeeper: Preventing Unreliable Pretrial Ediscovery From Jeopardizing A Reliable Fact-Finding Process, Daniel K. Gelb

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Adverse Inference Instruction After Revised Rule 37(E): An Evidence-Based Proposal, Shira A. Sheindlin, Natalie M. Orr

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Born This Way: How Neuroimaging Will Impact Jury Deliberations, Tanneika Minott

Duke Law & Technology Review

Advancements in technology have now made it possible for scientists to provide assessments of an individual’s mental state. Through neuroimaging, scientists can create visual images of the brain that depict whether an individual has a mental disorder or other brain defect. The importance of these advancements is particularly evident in the context of criminal law, where defendants are able to dispute their culpability for crimes committed where they lack the capacity to form criminal intent. Thus, in theory, a neuroimage depicting defective brain functioning could demonstrate a defendant’s inability to form the requisite criminal intent. Due to early successes in …

Evidence, John E. Hall Jr., W. Scott Henwood, Jacque Smith Clarke

Mercer Law Review

This year represents the first full survey period' in which the "new" Georgia Evidence Code, title 24 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated (O.C.G.A.), takes effect. These new rules took effect on January 1, 2013. The rules conform in large part to the Federal Rules of Evidence and have continued to change the face of evidence law in Georgia. Appellate cases are now providing guidance and direction on the courts' interpretation of the rules, and these cases affect litigants' strategies. This Survey highlights cases decided by the Georgia Court of Appeals and the Georgia Supreme Court between June 1, …

Shield Law - The Qualified Privilege Of Newscasters & Journalists In Non-Confidential News - Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. Combest, 828 N.E.2d 583 (N.Y. 2005), Albert V. Messina Jr.

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York, In The Matter Of Nassau County Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated June 24, 2003 "Doe Law Firm" V. Spitzer, Christin Harris

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court, New York County, People V. Vasquez, Jessica Goodwin

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Paul, Adam D'Antonio

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appellate Division, First Department, People V. Bradley, Kathleen Egan

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.