Evidence Commons^™

Conditional Probative Value: Neoclassicism Without Myth, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

The concept of conditional relevance is an essential aspect of the classical model of evidentiary law. Some of the great scholars of evidence have endorsed and shaped it.1 Under Federal Rule of Evidence 104(b) it plays a crucial role in the division of responsibility between judge and jury,2 as well as in the application of the personal knowledge3 and authentication 4 requirements. And the Supreme Court has applied it with great force.5 In recent years, though, the concept has come under attack from several notable scholars. The late Vaughn Ball led the assault, calling the concept a "myth."'6 Peter Tillers, …

Response: Exaggerated And Misleading Reports Of The Death Of Conditional Relevance, Peter Tillers

Michigan Law Review

In 1980 the late Professor Vaughn C. Ball of the University of Georgia published an article called The Myth of Conditional Relevancy. Ball's article is widely admired. One well-known evidence scholar, Ronald J. Allen, liked Ball's article so much that he borrowed its title word for word. Although the extent of Allen's enthusiasm for Ball's analysis may be unmatched, a good number of students of evidence - including this writer - have said that Ball's analysis of conditional relevance is both original and important. Richard Friedman, by contrast, cannot be counted as one of Ball's more ardent admirers. Although Friedman …

Evidence, Marc T. Treadwell

Mercer Law Review

Previous survey articles have discussed the need for precise objections to preserve an issue for appeal. Sometimes, however, even the most precise objection may not be sufficient. In Garner v. Victory Express, Inc., plaintiff objected to defendant's counsel's comment during closing argument on the lack of any evidence indicating that defendant was unsafe or careless. Apparently, defense counsel was referring to the absence of evidence of prior negligence on the part of defendant's driver. The trial court overruled this objection. Plaintiff argued that because he was precluded from proving defendant's negligence by his prior driving record or from proving …

Evidence—New Federal Standard For Admission Of Scientific Evidence. Daubert V. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 113 S. Ct. 2786 (1993)., Ed Koon

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Maryland's Adoption Of A Code Of Evidence, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This short paper written just after the adoption of the Maryland Rules of Evidence explains the rules and the process it took to adapt the Federal Rules of Evidence for use in Maryland.

Factors For Reasonable Suspicion: When Black And Poor Means Stopped And Frisked, David A. Harris

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Technology Comes To The Courtroom, And . . ., Fredric I. Lederer

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Cart V. Marcum: The Discovery Rule As An Exception To The Statute Of Limitations In West Virginia, James R. Leach

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Comment: Theory And Practice In Dna Fingerprinting, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

Throughout her useful paper on DNA identification, Professor Roeder properly attends to both theory and practice. Thus she acknowledges the theoretical soundness of certain criticisms that have been made of the standard paradigm used to evaluate DNA random match probabilities but argues that in practice these criticisms matter little. I am thinking here of the arguments that those cautioning against overweighing DNA evidence have made regarding the undeniable existence of population substructure and its potential implications for independence assumptions supporting the application of the product rule and for the use of convenience samples, such as data garnered from no more …

Assuming Facts Not In Evidence: A Response To Russell M. Coombs, Reforming New Jersey Evidence Law On Fresh Complaint Of Rape, Sherry F. Colb

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Stretching The "Terry" Doctrine To The Search For Evidence Of Crime: Canine Sniffs, State Constitutions, And The Reasonable Suspicion Standard, Kenneth L. Pollack

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Fourth Amendment, protects an individual's interest in freedom from unreasonable government intrusions into personal privacy. When a court finds an investigative technique to be a search within the Amendment's meaning, it effectively concludes that Fourth Amendment protection should apply. If the government activity constitutes a search, that activity must be reasonable. If the activity does not amount to a search, however, the government enjoys virtual freedom to conduct that activity as unreasonably as it pleases. For pure investigatory searches, the United States Supreme Court has found that the probable cause requirement strikes the proper balance in defining reasonableness. Unlike …

Experts, Liars, And Guns For Hire: A Different Perspective On The Qualification Of Technical Expert Witnesses, Christopher P. Murphy

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Admissibility Of Dna Evidence In Washington After State V. Cauthron, Elizabeth A. Allen

Washington Law Review

In State v. Cauthron, the Washington Supreme Court issued its first opinion concerning forensic DNA evidence. The court clearly held that the principles underlying DNA evidence and the restricted fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) method of DNA typing are generally accepted in the scientific community and are therefore admissible under the Frye test. The court refused to find that the trial court had properly admitted DNA evidence, however, because testimony that the suspect's DNA "matched" the perpetrator's was not supported by probability statistics. This Note demonstrates that the court was unclear in its discussion of when probability statistics meet the Frye …

Out Of The Twilight Zone: The Implications Of Daubert V. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Diana K. Sheiness

Washington Law Review

In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the United States Supreme Court held that the Federal Rules of Evidence had not implicitly incorporated the general acceptance, or Frye, test for scientific evidence. Instead, the Court interpreted Rule 702 to mean that judges should admit challenged scientific testimony only after determining that its underlying method or theory is scientifically valid. This Note argues that the essence of the Daubert decision is that judges must ascertain whether or not the studies underlying proffered testimony have been performed in accordance with sound scientific principles. The Note analyzes several cases to illustrate appropriate and …

Mihas V. United States, Jennifer Fox

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Maryland's First Evidence Code, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This outline from a talk given by Professor McLain outlines the history of the rules of evidence Maryland has used and provides a quick summary of the then-new Title 5, the Maryland Rules of Evidence.

Are You My Mother? The Scientific And Legal Validity Of Conventional Blood Testing And Dna Fingerprinting To Establish Proof Of Parentage In Immigration Cases, Alan R. Davis

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Using Impartial Experts In Valuations: A Forum-Specific Approach, Andrew Macgregor Smith

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dna Fingerprinting: The Virginia Approach, James P. O'Brien Jr.

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

2. Young Children's Understanding Of "Remember" And "Forget.", Thomas D. Lyon, John H. Flavell

Thomas D. Lyon

The Meaning Of Daubert And What That Means For Forensic Science, Randolph N. Jonakait

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Discovery In The Real World, Minna J. Kotkin

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Admission Of Hearsay Evidence Where Defedant Misconduct Causes The Unavailability Of A Prosecution Witness, Paul T. Markland

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confrontation And Hearsay: New Wine In An Old Bottle, The Honorable Anthony M. Brannon

Campbell Law Review

No abstract provided.

Expert Testimony Regarding The Speed Of A Vehicle: The Status Of North Carolina Law And The State Of The Art, Lawrence F. Mazer, Charles R. Manning, Richard T. Edwards, Michael A. Sutton

Campbell Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Admissibility Of Prior Acquittal Evidence - Has North Carolina Adopted The "Minority View?" - The Effect Of State V. Scott, Matthew S. Sullivan

Campbell Law Review

This Note will examine the court's decision in State v. Scott. First, the Note will address the facts of the case. Second, it will set out the background on how courts decide whether evidence of this nature should be admitted, mainly focusing on Rules 403 and 404(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Evidence. Next, the Note will analyze how the court arrived at this "bright-line" rule as well as the effect it will have in future cases. Finally, the Note will conclude that even though North Carolina adopted the "minority rule", this approach is proper under the concept …

Indiana Rules Of Evidence, Ivan E. Bodensteiner

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Junk Science, Daubert, And Ohio Rule 702, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Right To Counsel: People V. West

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trances, Trials, And Tribulations; Symposium Comparing New York And Federal Evidence Law, Gary Shaw

Scholarly Works

A transcript of the author’s remarks at a 1994 symposium comparing New York and Federal Laws regarding hypnosis and witness testimony.