Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Recent Development: Hailes V. State: The State May Appeal A Trial Court's Ruling Excluding A Dying Declaration; The Length Of Time Between A Declarant's Statement And Death Is Irrelevant In A Dying Declaration Analysis; The Confrontation Clause Is Inapplicable To Dying Declarations, Lauren A. Panfile
University of Baltimore Law Forum
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the State may appeal a trial court’s suppression of a victim’s dying declaration based on the legislative intent of Section 12-302(c)(4)(i) of the Maryland Code, Courts and Judicial Procedure Article (“section 12-302(c)(4)(i)”). Hailes v. State, 442 Md. 488, 497-98, 113 A.3d 608, 613-14 (2015). The court further held that a victim’s statement, made while on life support, was a dying declaration regardless of the fact that the victim died two years after making the statement. Id. at 506, 113 A.3d at 618. Finally, the court held that the Confrontation Clause of the …
Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Paul, Adam D'Antonio
Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Paul, Adam D'Antonio
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Admissibility Of Opinions In Dying Declarations - Connor V. State, Laurence M. Katz
Admissibility Of Opinions In Dying Declarations - Connor V. State, Laurence M. Katz
Maryland Law Review
No abstract provided.
Evidence-Hearsay-Impeachment Of Hearsay By Declarant's Inconsistent Statements, Ira M. Price, Ii S.Ed.
Evidence-Hearsay-Impeachment Of Hearsay By Declarant's Inconsistent Statements, Ira M. Price, Ii S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
In an action of trespass to try title to land claimed through adverse possession by defendant, the date when defendant first asserted a hostile claim to the premises so as to start the ten year statute of limitations was in issue. Plaintiff's witness, W, was allowed to testify that defendant had told him and others that plaintiffs owned individual interests in the land and that he did not exclusively claim the land. Defendant's witness, Y, then testified over objection that witness, W, had told him that defendant had long claimed the land, and had farmed and fenced …
Recent Important Decisions, Michigan Law Review
Recent Important Decisions, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Admiralty - Workmen's Compensation - Is a Hydroplane a Vessel? - Claimant was employed in the care and management of a hydroplane which was moored in navigable waters. The hydroplane began to drag anchor and drift toward the beach, where it was in danger of being wrecked. Claimant waded into the water and was struck by the propeller. Held, claimant is not entitled to compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Law, since a hydroplane while on navigable waters is a vessel, and therefore the jurisdiction of the admiralty excludes that of the State Industrial Commission. Reinhardt v. Newport Flying Service Corp. …