Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (152)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (117)
- William & Mary Law School (62)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (47)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (42)
-
- Seattle University School of Law (37)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (36)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (33)
- Duke Law (32)
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law (28)
- University of Washington School of Law (28)
- American University Washington College of Law (27)
- Pepperdine University (27)
- Brooklyn Law School (25)
- Fordham Law School (25)
- UIC School of Law (25)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (22)
- University of Miami Law School (22)
- Mercer University School of Law (21)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (21)
- University of Richmond (21)
- Cleveland State University (20)
- West Virginia University (20)
- University of Georgia School of Law (19)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (18)
- Georgetown University Law Center (16)
- University of Kentucky (15)
- University of Maine School of Law (15)
- BLR (14)
- Cornell University Law School (14)
- Keyword
-
- Evidence (324)
- Testimony (67)
- Admissibility (62)
- Sixth Amendment (56)
- Witnesses (55)
-
- Hearsay (52)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (51)
- Confrontation Clause (49)
- United States Supreme Court (49)
- Criminal law (47)
- Police (47)
- Exclusionary rule (43)
- Fourth Amendment (35)
- Cross-examination (34)
- Criminal procedure (33)
- DNA (30)
- Criminal Law (28)
- Criminal justice (28)
- Expert testimony (28)
- Due process (27)
- Scientific evidence (27)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (26)
- Crawford v. Washington (25)
- Fifth Amendment (24)
- Supreme Court (24)
- Confessions (23)
- Litigation (23)
- Trials (22)
- Criminal Procedure (21)
- Law (21)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Faculty Scholarship (110)
- Articles (80)
- Faculty Publications (72)
- Cardozo Law Review (68)
- Michigan Law Review (42)
-
- Seattle University Law Review (35)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (31)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (30)
- Pepperdine Law Review (26)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (23)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (22)
- Mercer Law Review (21)
- UIC Law Review (21)
- Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal (20)
- Indiana Law Journal (20)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (20)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (19)
- Washington Law Review (19)
- West Virginia Law Review (18)
- Cleveland State Law Review (17)
- Fordham Law Review (15)
- Touro Law Review (15)
- ExpressO (14)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (14)
- Maine Law Review (14)
- Scholarly Works (14)
- University of Richmond Law Review (14)
- Maryland Law Review (13)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (12)
- Kentucky Law Journal (12)
- Publication Type
Articles 1291 - 1320 of 1439
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The Supreme Court And The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination: Has The Burger Court Retreated?, Paul Marcus
The Supreme Court And The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination: Has The Burger Court Retreated?, Paul Marcus
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Witness Intimidation, Michael H. Graham
Witness Intimidation, Michael H. Graham
Florida State University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Balancing Government Efficienty And The Protection Of Individual Liberties: An Analysis Of The Conflit Between Executive Branch "Housekeeping" Regulations And Criminal Defendants' Rights To A Constitutionally Fair Trial, James F. Ponsoldt
Scholarly Works
This Article addresses the issue of whether an accused person should be entitled to obtain and use at trial relevant government information or the testimony of government employees to prove his innocence, regardless of whether he has revealed in advance to his adversary his intended use of that information or the specific content of that testimony. Part I describes the federal "housekeeping" statute and the Justice Department's housekeeping regulations, which require that subpoenaed government employees not disclose evidence unless the person seeking that evidence has first summarized the requested evidence in advance, explained its intended use, and obtained permission from …
Capabilities Of Modern Forensic Laboratories, Irving C. Stone
Capabilities Of Modern Forensic Laboratories, Irving C. Stone
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Scientific Evidence And The Question Of Judicial Capacity, John W. Wesley
Scientific Evidence And The Question Of Judicial Capacity, John W. Wesley
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Introduction: Trends And Developments With Respect To That Amendment 'Central To Enjoyment Of Other Guarantees Of The Bill Of Rights', Yale Kamisar
Articles
Seventy years ago, in the famous Weeks case,' the Supreme Court evoked a storm of controversy by promulgating the federal exclusionary rule. When, a half-century later, in the landmark Mapp case,2 the Court extended the Weeks rule to state criminal proceedings, at least one experienced observer assumed that the controversy "today finds its end." 3 But as we all know now, Mapp only intensified the controversy. Indeed, in recent years spirited debates over proposals to modify the exclusionary rule or to scrap it entirely have filled the air - and the law reviews.'
Inculpatory Statements Against Penal Interest: State V. Parris Goes Too Far, James E. Beaver, Cheryl Mccleary
Inculpatory Statements Against Penal Interest: State V. Parris Goes Too Far, James E. Beaver, Cheryl Mccleary
Seattle University Law Review
This article first demonstrates that courts historically did not trust penal interest statements in general, and that courts were extremely suspicious of any statements by a third party that implicated the defendant. Since Washington adopted Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3) verbatim, this article then analyzes the legislative history of the rule. The article concludes that the legislative history favored exclusion of inculpatory statements but that Congress failed to codify the exclusion because of unrelated problems. Finally, the article discusses the confrontation clause problems that arise when inculpatory statements are allowed into evidence. This article argues that the Parris holding should …
New Hearsay Exceptions For A Child's Statement Of Sexual Abuse, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (1984), Glen Skoler
New Hearsay Exceptions For A Child's Statement Of Sexual Abuse, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (1984), Glen Skoler
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Jackson V. Virginia: Reopening The Pandora's Box Of The Legal Sufficiency Of Drug Identification Evidence, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Jackson V. Virginia: Reopening The Pandora's Box Of The Legal Sufficiency Of Drug Identification Evidence, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
The Fifth Amendment Privilege And Documents--Cutting Fisher's Tangled Line, Robert Heidt
The Fifth Amendment Privilege And Documents--Cutting Fisher's Tangled Line, Robert Heidt
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
Evaluating The Expert: Judicial Expectations Of Expert Opinion Evidence In Child Placement Adjudications, Jane W. Ellis
Evaluating The Expert: Judicial Expectations Of Expert Opinion Evidence In Child Placement Adjudications, Jane W. Ellis
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Use Of Scientific Evidence In Rape Prosecutions, John T. Tucker Iii
The Use Of Scientific Evidence In Rape Prosecutions, John T. Tucker Iii
University of Richmond Law Review
Rape is defined as "unlawful sexual intercourse with a female without her consent." The crime has three basic elements: lack of consent, penetration, and identification of the assailant. Successful rape prosecutions are increasingly utilizing scientific evidence to investigate and prove the elements of rape. The purpose of this paper is to explore the many uses of scientific evidence with an eye towards providing a useful checklist to aid attorneys involved in a rape prosecution.
Rethinking Self-Incrimination In Great Britain, Mark Berger
Rethinking Self-Incrimination In Great Britain, Mark Berger
Faculty Works
No abstract provided.
Winfield V. Commonwealth: The Application Of The Virginia Rape Shield Statute, Philip L. Hatchett
Winfield V. Commonwealth: The Application Of The Virginia Rape Shield Statute, Philip L. Hatchett
University of Richmond Law Review
In Winfield v. Commonwealth, the Virginia Supreme Court held that the state's recently enacted rape shield statute could not restrict or infringe upon the defendant's sixth amendment right under the United States Constitution to confront his accusers. In overruling the trial judge, the court stated that section 18.2-67.7 of the Code of Virginia actually expanded the admissibility of evidence related to specific prior sexual conduct of the prosecutrix. By this ruling, Virginia has joined a minority of jurisdictions which have refused to recognize the special dilemma of the prosecutrix in a rape trial and to grant additional protections under her …
Gates, 'Probable Cause', 'Good Faith', And Beyond, Yale Kamisar
Gates, 'Probable Cause', 'Good Faith', And Beyond, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Illinois v. Gates1 was the most eagerly awaited constitutional-criminal procedure case of the 1982 Term. I think it fair to say, however, that it was awaited a good deal more eagerly by law enforcement officials and the Americans for Effective Law Enforcement than by defense lawyers and the American Civil Liberties Union. As it turned out, of course, the Gates Court, to the disappointment of many, did not reach the question whether the exclusionary rule in search and seizure cases should be modified so as not to require the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of the fourth amendment when …
Evidence, Linda S. Williams
United States V. Leon, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
United States V. Leon, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Weight Versus Sufficiency Of Evidence: Tibbs V. Florida, Thomas S. Ginter
Weight Versus Sufficiency Of Evidence: Tibbs V. Florida, Thomas S. Ginter
Buffalo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Good Faith, The Exclusionary Remedy, And Rule-Oriented Adjudication In The Criminal Process, Gerald G. Ashdown
Good Faith, The Exclusionary Remedy, And Rule-Oriented Adjudication In The Criminal Process, Gerald G. Ashdown
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Watching The Judiciary Watch The Police, Jon O. Newman
Watching The Judiciary Watch The Police, Jon O. Newman
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Police Practices and the Law: Essays from the Michigan Law ReviewThe University of Michigan Press
A Proposal For Discovery Depositions For Criminal Cases In Illinois, 16 J. Marshall L. Rev. 547 (1983), James J. Graney
A Proposal For Discovery Depositions For Criminal Cases In Illinois, 16 J. Marshall L. Rev. 547 (1983), James J. Graney
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
People V. Eichelberger: Police-Created Probable Cause As An Exigent Circumstance, 16 J. Marshall L. Rev. 457 (1983), Leslie B. Wulfsohn
People V. Eichelberger: Police-Created Probable Cause As An Exigent Circumstance, 16 J. Marshall L. Rev. 457 (1983), Leslie B. Wulfsohn
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Standard For Admitting Scientific Evidence: A Critique From The Perspective Of Juror Psychology, Edward J. Imwinkelried
The Standard For Admitting Scientific Evidence: A Critique From The Perspective Of Juror Psychology, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Villanova Law Review (1956 - )
No abstract provided.
Evidence - Privilege Against Adverse Spousal Testimony - A Testifying Spouse May Invoke The Privilege Against Adverse Spousal Testimony In A Grand Jury Proceeding Even Though The Government Has Promised That The Nontestifying Spouse Will Not Be Indicted By That Particular Grand Jury If The Nontestifying Spouse Is A Target Of The Underlying Investigation, Gary S. Lewis
Villanova Law Review (1956 - )
No abstract provided.
Confessions, Yale Kamisar
Confessions, Yale Kamisar
Book Chapters
The entry for 'Confessions' in the Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice, 1983
Does (Did) (Should) The Exclusionary Rule Rest On A 'Principled Basis' Rather Than An 'Empirical Proposition'?, Yale Kamisar
Does (Did) (Should) The Exclusionary Rule Rest On A 'Principled Basis' Rather Than An 'Empirical Proposition'?, Yale Kamisar
Articles
[U]ntil the [exclusionary rule] rests on a principled basis rather than an empirical proposition, [the rule] will remain in a state of unstable equilibrium. Mapp v. Ohio, which overruled the then twelve-year-old Wolf case and imposed the fourth amendment exclusionary rule (the Weeks doctrine) on the states as a matter of fourteenth amendment due process, seemed to mark the end of an era. Concurring in Mapp, Justice Douglas recalled that Wolf had evoked "a storm of constitutional controversy which only today finds its end."' But in the two decades since Justice Douglas made this observation, the storm of controversy has …
When Blood Is Their Argument: Probabilities In Criminal Cases, Genetic Markers, And, Once Again, Bayes' Theorem, Randolph N. Jonakait
When Blood Is Their Argument: Probabilities In Criminal Cases, Genetic Markers, And, Once Again, Bayes' Theorem, Randolph N. Jonakait
Articles & Chapters
Revolutionary advances in blood typing soon will cause a dramatic increase in the presentation of statistical evidence in criminal trials. Courts have admitted statistics into criminal trials before, and the proper use of this type of evidence has been debated previously. Until now, however, such mathematical evidence has been rare. Recently, however, a number of courts have admitted probability evidence derived from new and complex blood tests. Such evidence may soon be as commonplace as fingerprint testimony. The courts that have admitted this evidence, however, have done so without learning from past discussions about the proper role of statistical evidence. …
The Procurement And Presentation Of Evidence In Courts-Martial: Compulsory Process And Confrontation, Fredric I. Lederer, Francis A. Gilligan
The Procurement And Presentation Of Evidence In Courts-Martial: Compulsory Process And Confrontation, Fredric I. Lederer, Francis A. Gilligan
Faculty Publications
Although pretrial litigation often seems to render trial on the merits something of an anti-climax, adversarial adjudication is of course the focus of the criminal justice system, military or civilian. Once trial on the merits has begun, trial and defense counsel naturally utilize the rules of evidence in the fashion most likely to make the most of the evidence available to them. Yet, as all lawyers are aware, the period since the enactment of the Uniform Code of Military Justice has brought sweeping changes not only in military criminal law, but also in the "constitutionalization" of the law of evidence. …
Constitutional Constraints On The Admissibility Of Grand Jury Testimony: The Unavailable Witness, Confrontation, And Due Process, Barbara L. Strack
Constitutional Constraints On The Admissibility Of Grand Jury Testimony: The Unavailable Witness, Confrontation, And Due Process, Barbara L. Strack
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Defendants, however, have raised serious constitutional objections to the introduction of grand jury testimony when the witness is unavailable to testify at trial. These claims have focused on the confrontation clause of the sixth amendment and the due process clauses of the fifth and fourteenth amendments. Defendants have contended that the introduction of testimony from a grand jury proceeding which cannot be subjected to cross-examination fatally compromises the defendant's right to a fair trial. Lower courts are split over admitting grand jury testimony in these circumstances, and the Supreme Court has yet to rule on the issue. As a result, …