Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Absent Declarants (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1)
- Confrontation Clause (1)
- Courts (1)
-
- Crawford v. Washington (1)
- Emotion (1)
- Emotional (1)
- Epistemology (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Evidence Rules (1)
- Feminine (1)
- Feminist (1)
- Hearsay Exception (1)
- Judges (1)
- Judicial decision-making (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Jury (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal Analysis and Writing (1)
- Legal History (1)
- Legal Profession (1)
- Litigation (1)
- Narrative (1)
- Narratology (1)
- Nonhearsay (1)
- Nussbaum (1)
- Politics (1)
- Practice and Procedure (1)
- Prejudice (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Altering Attention In Adjudication, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Andrew J. Wistrich, Chris Guthrie
Altering Attention In Adjudication, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Andrew J. Wistrich, Chris Guthrie
Jeffrey J. Rachlinski
Judges decide complex cases in rapid succession but are limited by cognitive constraints. Consequently judges cannot allocate equal attention to every aspect of a case. Case outcomes might thus depend on which aspects of a case are particularly salient to the judge. Put simply, a judge focusing on one aspect of a case might reach a different outcome than a judge focusing on another. In this Article, we report the results of a series of studies exploring various ways in which directing judicial attention can shape judicial outcomes. In the first study, we show that judges impose shorter sentences when …
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
James L. Kainen
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 …
Tell Us A Story, But Don't Make It A Good One: Resolving The Confusion Regarding Emotional Stories And Federal Rule Of Evidence 403, Cathren Page
Cathren Page
Abstract: Tell Us a Story, But Don’t Make It A Good One: Resolving the Confusion Regarding Emotional Stories and Federal Rule of Evidence 403 by Cathren Koehlert-Page Courts need to reword their opinions regarding Rule 403 to address the tension between the advice to tell an emotionally evocative story at trial and the notion that evidence can be excluded if it is too emotional. In the murder mystery Mystic River, Dave Boyle is kidnapped in the beginning. The audience feels empathy for Dave who as an adult becomes one of the main suspects in the murder of his friend Jimmy’s …