Evidence Commons^™

Why Do We Admit Criminal Confessions Into Evidence?, David Crump

Seattle University Law Review

There is an enormous literature about the admissibility of criminal confessions. But almost all of it deals with issues related to self-incrimination or, to a lesser extent, with hearsay or accuracy concerns. As a result, the question whether we ever admit criminal confessions into evidence has not been the subject of much analysis. This gap is odd, since confessions are implicitly disfavored by a proportion of the literature and they often collide with exclusionary doctrines. Furthermore, the self-incrimination issue sometimes is resolved by balancing, and it would help if we knew what we were balancing. Therefore, one might ask: Why …

Clarifying The Scope Of The Self-Incrimination Clause: City Of Hays V. Vogt, Samantha Ruben

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Three months after oral arguments, the Supreme Court dismissed the writ of certiorari in City of Hays v. Vogt as improvidently granted. The question in Vogt was whether the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination is violated when incriminating statements are used at a probable cause hearing, as opposed to a criminal trial. As a result of the “DIG,” the Court left a circuit split unresolved surrounding the meaning of a “criminal case” within the Fifth Amendment’s Self-Incrimination Clause.

This note argues that the Supreme Court should not have dismissed Vogt and should have decided that the Fifth Amendment right against …

The Admissibility Of Confessions Compelled By Foreign Coercion: A Compelling Question Of Values In An Era Of Increasing International Criminal Cooperation, Geoffrey S. Corn, Kevin Cieply

Pepperdine Law Review

This Article proceeds on a simple and clear premise: a confession extracted by torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment should never be admitted into evidence in a U.S. criminal trial. Whether accomplished through extending the Due Process or Self-Incrimination based exclusionary rules to foreign official coercion, or by legislative action, such exclusion is necessary to align evidentiary practice regarding confessions procured by foreign agents with our nation's fundamental values as reflected in the Fifth Amendment and our ratification of the CAT. This outcome is not incompatible with Connelly. Rather, this Article explores the limits of the Court's language in …

Forced Decryption As Equilibrium—Why It’S Constitutional And How Riley Matters, Dan Terzian

Northwestern University Law Review

This Essay considers whether the government can force a person to decrypt his computer. The only courts to consider the issue limited their analyses to rote application of predigital doctrine and dicta. This is a mistake; courts should instead aim to maintain the ex ante equilibrium of privacy and government power. This approach—seeking equilibrium—was just endorsed by the Supreme Court in Riley v. California, a recent Fourth Amendment case. Yet Riley’s rationale also extends to the Fifth Amendment’s Self-Incrimination Clause, and maintaining equilibrium there requires permitting forced decryption. Because current doctrine can be interpreted as allowing forced decryption, …

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 Of New York, Bronx County, People V. Womack, Barry M. Frankenstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appellate Division, Third Department, People V. Smith, Jennifer Belk

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court, New York County, Hughes V. Farrey, Eric Pack

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Admissibility Of Field Test Results At Trial To Prove Intoxication, Vincent J. Costa

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fifth Amendment Protection For Public Employees: Garrity And Limited Constitutional Protections From Use Of Employer Coerced Statements In Internal Investigations And Practical Considerations, J. Michael Mcguinness

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Discovery By The Prosecution In Criminal Cases: Prudhomme Reconsidered , Jon R. Rolefson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Two Notes On Evidence: Privileges And Hearsay, J. W. Deese

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

New York’S Grant Of Greater Fifth Amendment Rights To Sexual Predators In Somta Proceedings - New York V. Suggs, Lina R. Carbuccia

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Electronic Recording Of Criminal Interrogations, Roberto Iraola

University of Richmond Law Review

Should law enforcement officers be required to record, by video or audiotape, custodial interrogations of suspects? If so, how much, the entire interrogation or just the confession? Many prosecutors and police departments maintain that a recording requirement will hamper law enforcement and discourage suspects from talking. Proponents of this measure argue that the recording of interrogations protects against false confessions, augments the effective administration of justice, and serves to improve the relationship between the public and the police.

This article generally examines the developing case law on this question. Because of the incriminating nature of confessions, the article, by way …

A Jurisprudence Of Doubt: Missouri V. Seibert, United States V. Patane, And The Supreme Court's Continued Confusion About The Constitutional Status Of Miranda, Johnathan L. Rogers

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Cowboy Prosecutors And Subpoenas For Incriminating Evidence: The Consequences And Correction Of Excess, Robert P. Mosteller

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reconceiving The Right To Present Witnesses, Richard A. Nagareda

Michigan Law Review

Modem American law is, in a sense, a system of compartments. For understandable curricular reasons, legal education sharply distinguishes the law of evidence from both constitutional law and criminal procedure. In fact, the lines of demarcation between these three subjects extend well beyond law school to the organization of the leading treatises and case headnotes to which practicing lawyers routinely refer in their trade. Many of the most interesting questions in the law, however, do not rest squarely within a single compartment; instead, they concern the content and legitimacy of the lines of demarcation themselves. This article explores a significant, …

Between Rock And A Hard Place: The Right To Testify And Impeachment By Prior Conviction, Alan D. Hornstein

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rule 804(B)(1): Former Testimony

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Modern Confession Law After Duckworth V. Eagan: What's The Use Of Explaining?, Julia C. Weissman

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Fourth, Fifth, And Sixth Amendments, William E. Hellerstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Use Immunity Advisements And The Public Employee's Assertion Of The Fifth Amendment Privilege Against Self-Incrimination

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Current Controversies Concerning Witness Immunity In The Federal Courts, Jane Duffy

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Constitutional Protection Of Private Papers: The Role Of A Hierarchical Fourth Amendment, James A. Mckenna

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Miranda Warnings And The Harmless Error Doctrine: Comments On The Indiana Approach, Michael W. Fruehwald

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law--Evidence--Use Of Miranda-Violative Confessions For Impeachment Purposes, William F. Dobbs Jr.

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure--Self-Incrimination--Harmless Error--Application Of The Harmless Error Doctrine To Violations Of Miranda: The California Experience, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Using decisions of the appellate courts of California that have applied the federal harmless error rule to violations of Miranda v. Arizona and Escobedo v. Illinois, this Note will examine the logic and effects of the California application. However, the California experience can only be understood by first briefly describing the United States Supreme Court's decisions regarding harmless constitutional error and then showing the approaches taken by other states in their application of the harmless error rule to Miranda violations. Not only will this analysis put the California experience in its proper perspective, but it will also show the …

The Psychiatrist As An Expert Witness: Some Ruminations And Speculations, Bernard L. Diamond, David W. Louisell

Michigan Law Review

Consider the difference between the expert testimony of an orthopedic surgeon in a personal injury suit and the testimony of a psychiatrist in a murder trial in which some elements of the mens rea are at issue. In both instances an expert opinion is received in evidence, providing the trier of fact with technical, specialized information which must, or should, be available in order to permit a rational decision-making process. Well-established rules govern the nature of expert evidence and its mode of presentation. In legal theory, the orthopedic surgeon and the psychiatrist are both experts-physicians-who perform comparable functions in the …

Legal By-Products Of Chemical Testing For Intoxication, M. C. Slough, Paul E. Wilson

Cleveland State Law Review

One among many problems of national moment is the intoxicated motorist. Legislators have long fumbled for remedies to halt a wave of senseless killing and mutilation that has resulted from an unhappy combination of ethyl alcohol and mechanical power. Convictions in court have been too difficult to halt a wave of senseless killing and mutilation that has reconstructive and effective legal control. Jurors themselves, have often been hesitant to convict because the sum total of objective evidence produced has not convinced them that the subjects they were judging had actually been drunk or intoxicated.

Legal By-Products Of Chemical Testing For Intoxication, M. C. Slough, Paul E. Wilson

Cleveland State Law Review

One among many problems of national moment is the intoxicated motorist. Legislators have long fumbled for remedies to halt a wave of senseless killing and mutilation that has resulted from an unhappy combination of ethyl alcohol and mechanical power. Convictions in court have been too difficult to halt a wave of senseless killing and mutilation that has reconstructive and effective legal control. Jurors themselves, have often been hesitant to convict because the sum total of objective evidence produced has not convinced them that the subjects they were judging had actually been drunk or intoxicated.