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

Evidence Commons

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

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Evidence

After White V. Illinois: Fundamental Guarantees To A Hollow Right To Confront Witnesses, Patricia W. Bennett Jan 1993

After White V. Illinois: Fundamental Guarantees To A Hollow Right To Confront Witnesses, Patricia W. Bennett

Journal Articles

The thrust of this Article is three-fold: (1) to discuss the historical aspects of the Confrontation Clause and its interpretation by the United States Supreme Court, (2) to show that, with White v. Illinois, the Supreme Court lost its moorings with previous decisions and drifted into treacherous constitutional seas, and (3) to suggest a textual construction of the Confrontation Clause that would be harmonious with the hearsay rule while preserving the rights of the accused to face their actual accusers.


Protecting Criminal Defendants' Rights When The Government Adduces Scientific Evidence: The Confrontation Clause And Other Alternatives─A Response To Professor Giannelli, James W. Diehm Dec 1992

Protecting Criminal Defendants' Rights When The Government Adduces Scientific Evidence: The Confrontation Clause And Other Alternatives─A Response To Professor Giannelli, James W. Diehm

James W. Diehm

In his article Professor Giannelli articulates quite clearly the confrontation issues that arise when the government seeks to introduce scientific evidence testimony in a criminal case." His work is helpful to our understanding of the problems that develop in the limited contexts of expert testimony and laboratory reports. It also provides valuable insights into the relationship between the Confrontation Clause and the hearsay rules. However, perhaps most important is the contribution that he makes to our understanding of the right of confrontation and our attempts to define that right and its limitations. While I find myself to be in general …