Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Capital punishment (2)
- Criminal justice system (2)
- Criminal procedure (2)
- Evidence (2)
- Jury (2)
-
- Supreme Court (2)
- Absent Declarants (1)
- Administration of criminal justice (1)
- Admissible evidence (1)
- Character (1)
- Codification (1)
- Confrontation Clause (1)
- Crawford v. Washington (1)
- Crime (1)
- Criminal courts (1)
- Cross Examination (1)
- Death penalty (1)
- Dispositional Procedures (1)
- Equality before the law (1)
- Evidence Rules (1)
- Expert evidence (1)
- Federal Rule of Evidence 32 (1)
- Genetics; neuroscience; crime; criminality; logitudinal study; death penalty; mitigating factors; aggravating factors; alcohol addiction; substance abuse addiction; courts; judges; Cullen v. Pinholster; AEDPA (1)
- Hearsay (1)
- Hearsay Exception (1)
- Judge Henry Friendly (1)
- Judge Howard Levine (1)
- Judges (1)
- Judicial process (1)
- Judicial review (1)
Articles 1 - 16 of 16
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Bending The Rules Of Evidence, Edward K. Cheng, G. Alexander Nunn, Julia Simon-Kerr
Bending The Rules Of Evidence, Edward K. Cheng, G. Alexander Nunn, Julia Simon-Kerr
Faculty Scholarship
The evidence rules have well-established, standard textual meanings—meanings that evidence professors teach their law students every year. Yet, despite the rules’ clarity, courts misapply them across a wide array of cases: Judges allow past acts to bypass the propensity prohibition, squeeze hearsay into facially inapplicable exceptions, and poke holes in supposedly ironclad privileges. And that’s just the beginning.
The evidence literature sees these misapplications as mistakes by inept trial judges. This Article takes a very different view. These “mistakes” are often not mistakes at all, but rather instances in which courts are intentionally bending the rules of evidence. Codified evidentiary …
Criminal Court System Failures During Covid-19: An Empirical Study, Cynthia Alkon
Criminal Court System Failures During Covid-19: An Empirical Study, Cynthia Alkon
Faculty Scholarship
How did the criminal legal system respond to the early months of pandemic in 2020? This article reports the results of a unique national survey of judges, defense lawyers, and prosecutors that gives a snapshot of how the criminal legal system responded to the COVID-19 in the first five chaotic months. Criminal courts in the United States rely on in-person proceedings and formal and informal in-person communications to manage caseloads. The survey results detail, in ways not previously fully understood, how crucial these in-person communications are and how ill-prepared the criminal courts and legal professionals were to deal with the …
Challenges Facing Judges Regarding Expert Evidence In Criminal Cases, Paul W. Grimm
Challenges Facing Judges Regarding Expert Evidence In Criminal Cases, Paul W. Grimm
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
From Simple Statements To Heartbreaking Photographs And Videos: An Interdisciplinary Examination Of Victim Impact Evidence In Criminal Cases, Mitchell J. Frank
From Simple Statements To Heartbreaking Photographs And Videos: An Interdisciplinary Examination Of Victim Impact Evidence In Criminal Cases, Mitchell J. Frank
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
How Bayesian Are Judges?, Jack Knight, Mitu Gulati, David F. Levi
How Bayesian Are Judges?, Jack Knight, Mitu Gulati, David F. Levi
Faculty Scholarship
Richard Posner famously modeled judges as Bayesians in his book, How Judges Think? A key element of being Bayesian is that one constantly updates with new information. This model of the judge who is constantly learning and updating, particularly about local conditions, also is one of the reasons why the factual determinations of trial judges are given deference on appeal. But do judges in fact act like Bayesian updaters? Judicial evaluations of search warrant requests for probable cause provides an ideal setting to examine this question because the judges in this context have access to information on how well they …
Barriers To Entry And Justice Ginsburg’S Criminal Procedure Jurisprudence, Lisa Kern Griffin
Barriers To Entry And Justice Ginsburg’S Criminal Procedure Jurisprudence, Lisa Kern Griffin
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Book Review: American Jericho: A Book Review Of The Hanging Judge By Michael A. Ponsor, Giovanna Shay
Book Review: American Jericho: A Book Review Of The Hanging Judge By Michael A. Ponsor, Giovanna Shay
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Hanging Judge By Michael A. Ponsor -- A Book Review: Capital Punishment -- Is The Death Penalty Worth The Price?, Beth D. Cohen, Pat K. Newcombe
The Hanging Judge By Michael A. Ponsor -- A Book Review: Capital Punishment -- Is The Death Penalty Worth The Price?, Beth D. Cohen, Pat K. Newcombe
Faculty Scholarship
In 2000-2001, Judge Ponsor presided over the first death penalty case in Massachusetts in nearly 50 years, United States v. Gilbert. Gilbert’s trial marked only the third time that a federal capital case had gone to trial in a state without the death penalty. According to Ponsor, he felt a particularly heavy responsibility to ensure that both the government and the defense got a fair trial. In fact, in 2001, after the conclusion of the trial, Ponsor did something somewhat unusual for a judge; he wrote a lengthy editorial about the death penalty. He wrote: “[t]he simple question - not …
The Jury Wants To Take The Podium -- But Even With The Authority To Do So, Can It? An Interdisciplinary Examination Of Jurors' Questioning Of Witnesses At Trial, Mitchell J. Frank
The Jury Wants To Take The Podium -- But Even With The Authority To Do So, Can It? An Interdisciplinary Examination Of Jurors' Questioning Of Witnesses At Trial, Mitchell J. Frank
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Right To Plea Bargain With Competent Counsel After Cooper And Frye: Is The Supreme Court Making The Ordinary Criminal Process Too Long, Too Expensive, And Unpredictable In Pursuit Of Perfect Justice, Bruce A. Green
Faculty Scholarship
In Lafler v. Cooper and Missouri v. Frye, the Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of criminal defendants who were deprived of a favorable plea offer because of their lawyers’ professional lapses. In dissent, Justice Scalia complained that “[t]he ordinary criminal process has become too long, too expensive, and unpredictable,” because of the Court’s criminal procedure jurisprudence; that plea bargaining is “the alternative in which...defendants have sought relief,” and that the two new decisions on the Sixth Amendment right to effective representation in plea bargaining would add to the burden on the criminal process. This essay examines several aspects of …
The Micro And Macro Causes Of Prison Growth, John F. Pfaff
The Micro And Macro Causes Of Prison Growth, John F. Pfaff
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Courts' Increasing Consideration Of Behavioral Genetics Evidence In Criminal Cases: Results Of A Longitudinal Study, Deborah W. Denno
Courts' Increasing Consideration Of Behavioral Genetics Evidence In Criminal Cases: Results Of A Longitudinal Study, Deborah W. Denno
Faculty Scholarship
This article, which is part of a symposium honoring David Baldus, presents a unique study of all criminal cases (totaling thirty-three) that addressed behavioral genetics evidence from June 1, 2007, to July 1, 2011. The study builds upon this author’s prior research on all criminal cases (totaling forty-eight) that used such evidence during the preceding thirteen years (1994-2007). This combined collection of eighty-one criminal cases employing behavioral genetics evidence offers a rich context for determining how the criminal justice system has been handling genetics factors for nearly two decades, but also why the last four years reveal particularly important discoveries. …
How (Not) To Think Like A Punisher, Alice Ristroph
How (Not) To Think Like A Punisher, Alice Ristroph
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler
Faculty Scholarship
Crawford v. Washington’s historical approach to the confrontation clause establishes that testimonial hearsay inadmissible without confrontation at the founding is similarly inadmissible today, despite whether it fits a subsequently developed hearsay exception. Consequently, the requirement of confrontation depends upon whether an out-of-court statement is hearsay, testimonial, and, if so, whether it was nonetheless admissible without confrontation at the founding. A substantial literature has developed about whether hearsay statements are testimonial or were, like dying declarations, otherwise admissible at the founding. In contrast, this article focuses on the first question – whether statements are hearsay – which scholars have thus far …
The Standards' Recommendations On Dispositions: A Panel Discussion Panel Discussion, Stanley Z. Fisher
The Standards' Recommendations On Dispositions: A Panel Discussion Panel Discussion, Stanley Z. Fisher
Faculty Scholarship
ROFESSOR STANLEY FISHER, MODERATOR: Good evening. I'd like to welcome you all here. Of all of the volumes of the Juvenile Justice Standards Project, I suppose the most controversial are those dealing with the disposition stage. They have elicited a good deal of critical comment, even though they haven't yet been published, and many of the comments and criticisms have apparently been on the basis of speculation and rumor as to what the Standards actually say. We have with us tonight to discuss these Standards two persons who have a great deal of expertise in this field. The first, on …
Foreword: Waiver Of Constitutional Rights: Disquiet In The Citadel, Michael E. Tigar
Foreword: Waiver Of Constitutional Rights: Disquiet In The Citadel, Michael E. Tigar
Faculty Scholarship
Foreword to Harvard Law Review review of Supreme Court 1969 Term