Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Law (10)
- Courts (8)
- Civil Procedure (6)
- Criminal Procedure (5)
- Litigation (4)
-
- Law and Psychology (3)
- Administrative Law (2)
- Civil Law (2)
- Intellectual Property Law (2)
- Judges (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Juvenile Law (1)
- Law and Economics (1)
- Law and Race (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Life Sciences (1)
- Neuroscience and Neurobiology (1)
- Physical Sciences and Mathematics (1)
- Psychology (1)
- Science and Technology Law (1)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (1)
- Institution
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (6)
- Cleveland State University (3)
- Fordham Law School (3)
- The University of Akron (3)
- University of Maine School of Law (3)
-
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (3)
- Pepperdine University (2)
- University of Georgia School of Law (2)
- University of Richmond (2)
- Florida A&M University College of Law (1)
- Florida International University College of Law (1)
- Mitchell Hamline School of Law (1)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (6)
- Akron Law Review (3)
- Cleveland State Law Review (3)
- Fordham Law Review Online (3)
- Maine Law Review (3)
-
- Oklahoma Law Review (2)
- University of Richmond Law Review (2)
- FIU Law Review (1)
- Florida A & M University Law Review (1)
- Georgia Law Review (1)
- Journal of Business & Technology Law (1)
- Journal of Intellectual Property Law (1)
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (1)
- Mitchell Hamline Law Review (1)
- Nevada Law Journal (1)
- Northwestern University Law Review (1)
- Oklahoma Journal of Law and Technology (1)
- Pepperdine Law Review (1)
- The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process (1)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 35
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Neuropsychological Malingering Determination: The Illusion Of Scientific Lie Detection, Chunlin Leonhard, Christoph Leonhard
Neuropsychological Malingering Determination: The Illusion Of Scientific Lie Detection, Chunlin Leonhard, Christoph Leonhard
Georgia Law Review
Humans believe that other humans lie, especially when stakes are high. Stakes can be very high in a courtroom, from substantial amounts of monetary damages in civil litigation to liberty or life in criminal cases. One of the most frequently disputed issues in U.S. courts is whether litigants are malingering when they allege physical or mental conditions for which they are seeking damages or which would allow them to avoid criminal punishment. Understandably, creating a scientific method to detect lies is very appealing to all persons engaged in lie detection. Neuropsychologists claim that they can use neuropsychological assessment tests (Malingering …
How Florida’S Courts Should Evaluate The Admissibility Of Field Sobriety Testing And Blood Thc Levels Evidence In Marijuana Impaired Driving Prosecutions, Christopher Bomhoff
How Florida’S Courts Should Evaluate The Admissibility Of Field Sobriety Testing And Blood Thc Levels Evidence In Marijuana Impaired Driving Prosecutions, Christopher Bomhoff
FIU Law Review
Field sobriety and blood alcohol concentration tests are proven reliable techniques to determine whether a person us under the influence of alcohol. No such technique has been developed to reliably determine whether a person is under the influence of marijuana. However, despite a lack of scientific consensus regarding the reliability of field sobriety and blood toxicology tests to determine marijuana impairment, these methods are routinely used as evidence of guilt in marijuana impaired driving prosecutions. Twenty-four states have legalized the recreational use of marijuana, and Florida appears to be set to join them in the near future. As a result …
Scientific Excellence In The Forensic Science Community, Alice R. Isenberg, Cary T. Oien
Scientific Excellence In The Forensic Science Community, Alice R. Isenberg, Cary T. Oien
Fordham Law Review Online
This Article was prepared as a companion to the Fordham Law Review Reed Symposium on Forensic Expert Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, held on October 27, 2017, at Boston College School of Law. The Symposium took place under the sponsorship of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules. For an overview of the Symposium, see Daniel J. Capra, Foreword: Symposium on Forensic Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, 86 Fordham L. Rev. 1459 (2018).
Scientific Validity And Error Rates: A Short Response To The Pcast Report, Ted Robert Hunt
Scientific Validity And Error Rates: A Short Response To The Pcast Report, Ted Robert Hunt
Fordham Law Review Online
This Article was prepared as a companion to the Fordham Law Review Reed Symposium on Forensic Expert Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, held on October 27, 2017, at Boston College School of Law. The Symposium took place under the sponsorship of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules. For an overview of the Symposium, see Daniel J. Capra, Foreword: Symposium on Forensic Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, 86 Fordham L. Rev. 1459 (2018).
The Reliability Of The Adversarial System To Assess The Scientific Validity Of Forensic Evidence, Andrew D. Goldsmith
The Reliability Of The Adversarial System To Assess The Scientific Validity Of Forensic Evidence, Andrew D. Goldsmith
Fordham Law Review Online
This Article was prepared as a companion to the Fordham Law Review Reed Symposium on Forensic Expert Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, held on October 27, 2017, at Boston College School of Law. The Symposium took place under the sponsorship of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules. For an overview of the Symposium, see Daniel J. Capra, Foreword: Symposium on Forensic Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, 86 Fordham L. Rev. 1459 (2018).
Life After Daubert V. Merrell Dow: Maine As A Case Law Laboratory For Evidence Rule 702 Without Frye, Leigh Stephens Mccarthy
Life After Daubert V. Merrell Dow: Maine As A Case Law Laboratory For Evidence Rule 702 Without Frye, Leigh Stephens Mccarthy
Maine Law Review
In reaching its recent decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the United States Supreme Court grappled not with case law but with fundamental questions about the nature of science and its role in law. The court in Daubert addressed the problematic issue of admissibility of expert scientific testimony. In the end the Court rejected as an exclusionary rule the venerable standard set in 1923 by Frye v. United States. Frye held that scientific testimony was to be excluded unless it had gained “general acceptance” in its field. Daubert held that Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence …
Evaluating The Reliability Of Nonscientific Expert Testimony: A Partial Answer To The Questions Left Unresolved By Kumho Tire Co. V. Carmichael, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Evaluating The Reliability Of Nonscientific Expert Testimony: A Partial Answer To The Questions Left Unresolved By Kumho Tire Co. V. Carmichael, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Maine Law Review
For almost three-quarters of a century, the venerable standard announced in Frye v. United States governed the admissibility of scientific evidence. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia handed down the Frye decision in 1923. Under Frye, the proponent of testimony had to demonstrate that the expert's testimony was based on a generally accepted theory or technique. However, in 1993--seventy years after the rendition of the Frye decision--another court sitting in Washington, the United States Supreme Court, overturned the standard. The Court did so in its now celebrated Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals decision. In the interim between …
Scientific Evidence And Forensic Science Since Daubert: Maine Decides To Sit Out On The Dance, Thomas L. Bohan
Scientific Evidence And Forensic Science Since Daubert: Maine Decides To Sit Out On The Dance, Thomas L. Bohan
Maine Law Review
In 1993, the Supreme Court of the United States stated that with the federal adoption of statutory rules of evidence in 1975, the common law rule for determining admissibility of scientific testimony was superseded, and that thenceforth admissibility of scientific testimony was to be determined solely by Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (Rule 702). The Frye standard had been adopted in one form or another by most of the federal circuits and by many of the state courts during the 70 years preceding Daubert. Referred to as the “general acceptance” standard, the Frye standard--although adopted in a variety of forms--had …
The Moment Of Truth For Fmri: Will Deception Detection Pass Admissibility Hurdles In Oklahoma?, Julie Elizabeth Myers
The Moment Of Truth For Fmri: Will Deception Detection Pass Admissibility Hurdles In Oklahoma?, Julie Elizabeth Myers
Oklahoma Journal of Law and Technology
No abstract provided.
Discovering Forensic Fraud, Jennifer D. Oliva, Valena E. Beety
Discovering Forensic Fraud, Jennifer D. Oliva, Valena E. Beety
Northwestern University Law Review
This Essay posits that certain structural dynamics, which dominate criminal proceedings, significantly contribute to the admissibility of faulty forensic science in criminal trials. The authors believe that these dynamics are more insidious than questionable individual prosecutorial or judicial behavior in this context. Not only are judges likely to be former prosecutors, prosecutors are “repeat players” in criminal litigation and, as such, routinely support reduced pretrial protections for defendants. Therefore, we argue that the significant discrepancies between the civil and criminal pretrial discovery and disclosure rules warrant additional scrutiny.
In the criminal system, the near absence of any pretrial discovery means …
Unpacking Frye-Mack: A Critical Analysis Of Minnesota’S Frye-Mack Standard For Admitting Scientific Evidence, Zach Alter
Unpacking Frye-Mack: A Critical Analysis Of Minnesota’S Frye-Mack Standard For Admitting Scientific Evidence, Zach Alter
Mitchell Hamline Law Review
No abstract provided.
Innocent Suffering: The Unavailability Of Post-Conviction Relief In Virginia Courts, Kaitlyn Potter
Innocent Suffering: The Unavailability Of Post-Conviction Relief In Virginia Courts, Kaitlyn Potter
University of Richmond Law Review
This comment examines actual innocence in Virginia: the progress it has made, the problems it still faces, and the possibilities for reform. Part I addresses past reform to the system, spurred by the shocking tales of Thomas Haynesworth and others. Part II identifies three of the most prevalent systemic challenges marring Virginia's justice system: (1) flawed scientific evidence; (2) the premature destruction of evidence; and (3) false confessions and guilty pleas. Part III suggests ways in which Virginia can, and should, address these challenges to ensure that the justice system is actually serving justice.
Billy Joel: The Minstrel Testifies Or How The Rules Of Evidence Handcuff The Piano Man, Hon. Richard A. Dollinger
Billy Joel: The Minstrel Testifies Or How The Rules Of Evidence Handcuff The Piano Man, Hon. Richard A. Dollinger
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
"Gatekeeping" Agency Reliance On Scientific And Technical Materials After Daubert: Ensuring Relevance And Reliability In The Administrative Process, Paul S. Miller, Bert W. Rein
"Gatekeeping" Agency Reliance On Scientific And Technical Materials After Daubert: Ensuring Relevance And Reliability In The Administrative Process, Paul S. Miller, Bert W. Rein
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Increasing Use Of Challenges To Expert Evidence Under Daubert And Rule 702 In Patent Litigation, Douglas G. Smith
The Increasing Use Of Challenges To Expert Evidence Under Daubert And Rule 702 In Patent Litigation, Douglas G. Smith
Journal of Intellectual Property Law
No abstract provided.
The Trial Judge As Gatekeeper For Scientific Evidence: Will Ohio Rule Of Evidence 102 Frustrate The Ohio Courts' Role Under Daubert V. Merrell Dow?, Michael Lepp, Chrisopher B. Mcneil
The Trial Judge As Gatekeeper For Scientific Evidence: Will Ohio Rule Of Evidence 102 Frustrate The Ohio Courts' Role Under Daubert V. Merrell Dow?, Michael Lepp, Chrisopher B. Mcneil
Akron Law Review
This article considers the role of the trial court in responding to the changes wrought by scientific innovation. Particular consideration is given to the impact likely to be realized in Ohio trial courts from the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
[...]In order to appreciate the significance of Ohio Evidence Rule 102 in this context, it is helpful to first examine some of the events leading to Daubert, especially the application (and in some instances, the rejection) of Frye both in Ohio and at the federal level. Following that, this article will …
Can Post-Chicago Economics Survive Daubert?, Malcolm B. Coate, Jeffrey H. Fischer
Can Post-Chicago Economics Survive Daubert?, Malcolm B. Coate, Jeffrey H. Fischer
Akron Law Review
In Section II of this Article, we review the Supreme Court’s standard for allowing expert testimony as explained in Daubert and related opinions, and discuss in detail the City of Tuscaloosa and Concord Boat decisions that, following Daubert, excluded the economic expert testimony on which the plaintiffs relied. Section III presents an overview of the Chicago School of Economics, which sets a foundation for our commentary on the Post-Chicago school and serves as a basis for the evaluation of Chicago-based testimony in Section V. Section IV discusses the Post-Chicago School approach to antitrust analysis as a refinement of the Chicago …
Daubert, Probabilities And Possibilities, And The Ohio Solution: A Sensible Approach To Relevance Under Rule 702 In Civil And Criminal Applications, Andrew W. Jurs
Akron Law Review
Probability for expert opinions is the correct standard for civil cases based on the preponderance of the evidence burden of proof. Among other effects, the probability requirement reduces jury speculation, avoids absurdity, appropriately adopts legal relevance as the standard for admission, and avoids negative effects on the out-of-courtroom practices of professionals. Expert opinions explaining possibilities, while inappropriate for civil case consideration, have Rule 702 relevance and are useful in criminal cases based upon the beyond a reasonable doubt burden of proof. Based on an evaluation of federal and state cases, Rule 702, and the purposes of expert testimony, the Ohio …
Is Limited Remand Required If The District Court Admitted Or Excluded Evidence Without A Daubert Analysis?, Robert B. Gilbreath
Is Limited Remand Required If The District Court Admitted Or Excluded Evidence Without A Daubert Analysis?, Robert B. Gilbreath
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
Evaluating The Evaluation: Reliance Upon Mental Health Assessments In Cases Of Alleged Child Sexual Abuse, Sarah F. Shelton
Evaluating The Evaluation: Reliance Upon Mental Health Assessments In Cases Of Alleged Child Sexual Abuse, Sarah F. Shelton
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Developments In The Law Of Scientific Evidence: The Admissibility Of Polygraph Evidence, Sheila K. Hyatt
Developments In The Law Of Scientific Evidence: The Admissibility Of Polygraph Evidence, Sheila K. Hyatt
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Logic, Not Evidence, Supports A Change In Expert Testimony Standards: Why Evidentiary Standards Promulgated By The Supreme Court For Scientific Expert Testimony Are Inappropriate And Inefficient When Applied In Patent Infringement Suits, Claire R. Rollor
Journal of Business & Technology Law
No abstract provided.
Scientific Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: A Proposal For A Dual Standard Of Admissibility In Civil And Criminal Cases , William P. Haney Iii
Scientific Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: A Proposal For A Dual Standard Of Admissibility In Civil And Criminal Cases , William P. Haney Iii
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Proving Lost Profits Under Daubert: Five Questions Every Court Should Ask Before Admitting Expert Testimony, Robert M. Lloyd
Proving Lost Profits Under Daubert: Five Questions Every Court Should Ask Before Admitting Expert Testimony, Robert M. Lloyd
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Warping The Rules: How Some Courts Misapply Generic Evidentiary Rules To Exclude Polygraph Evidence, John C. Bush
Warping The Rules: How Some Courts Misapply Generic Evidentiary Rules To Exclude Polygraph Evidence, John C. Bush
Vanderbilt Law Review
Polygraph tests rely on the hypothesis that a subject's body yields physiologically different symptoms if he or she is lying.' When a polygraph test is administered, a mechanical apparatus records the subject's physiological changes, and the polygrapher conducting the examination interprets the data. The techniques for measuring physiological changes vary in their foci, which may include respiration, blood pressure, cardiovascular function, and skin resistance. The polygraph apparatus records changes to one or more of these foci, and a technician, or polygrapher, then analyzes the results to conclude whether the subject has been truthful.
Polygraph results factor into choices ranging from …
The Paranormal, Daubert, Dictionary Court, And A Futuristic Courtroom Drama, Joseph P. Baker
The Paranormal, Daubert, Dictionary Court, And A Futuristic Courtroom Drama, Joseph P. Baker
Florida A & M University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Christian V. Gray: The Oklahoma Supreme Court Accepts The Daubert Standard, Debra W. Mccormick, Randon J. Grau
Christian V. Gray: The Oklahoma Supreme Court Accepts The Daubert Standard, Debra W. Mccormick, Randon J. Grau
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Expert Testimony To Accommodate The Frye, Daubert, And Kumho Tire Standards Of Admissibility, Rhoda B. Billings
Expert Testimony To Accommodate The Frye, Daubert, And Kumho Tire Standards Of Admissibility, Rhoda B. Billings
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Scientific Evidence And The Ethical Obligations Of Attorneys, Michael J. Saks
Scientific Evidence And The Ethical Obligations Of Attorneys, Michael J. Saks
Cleveland State Law Review
This article considers the question: "What are the legal and ethical responsibilities of attorneys when offering scientific expert evidence to courts?" To a lesser extent it considers the responsibilities of attorneys to challenge such evidence when proffered and the ethical dimensions of the working relationship of lawyers and experts. Although the most prominent discussions of such issues have concerned so-called junk science in civil trials, the legal context upon which this article will focus is the criminal trial, where dubious science is more common, less questioned, and has even become institutionalized. The rules and practices of civil cases are provided …
Iola And Daubert, Leon D. Lazer