Law Commons^™

#Believewomen And The Presumption Of Innocence: Clarifying The Questions For Law And Life, Kimberly Kessler Ferzan

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Carey Law

The presumption of innocence and #BelieveWomen both embody compelling considerations, and we may wonder how to reconcile them. My project does not aim to reconcile the positions, but rather, it is prior to it. My goal in this paper is to better explicate the claims that underlie both #BelieveWomen and the presumption of innocence in law and life, as well as to identify instances in which cross-pollination, between our everyday evaluations and the legal system, is contaminating our thinking.

First, I begin with #BelieveWomen and sort through various ways to interpret this demand (though my survey is not exhaustive). I …

Bad Science Begets Bad Convictions: The Need For Postconviction Relief In The Wake Of Discredited Forensics, Jessica Gabel Cino

University of Denver Criminal Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Death Of Fairness: Texas's Future Dangerousness Revisited, Ana M. Otero

University of Denver Criminal Law Review

No abstract provided.

Colorado's Undemanding Notice Requirement: Pro Se Defendants And Forensic Technician Testimony, Sarah M. Morris, Lauren L. Fontana

University of Denver Criminal Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confronting The Backdoor Admission Of Testimonial Statements Against An Accused: The Danger Of Expert Reliance On Inadmissible Information, Sarah E. Stout

University of Denver Criminal Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Man Behind The Curtain: Confronting Expert Testimony, Daniel W. Edwards

University of Denver Criminal Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Confrontation Right, Richard D. Friedman

Book Chapters

This chapter examines the right of criminal defendants to be confronted with the witnesses against them. It first provides an overview of the nature, purposes, and costs of the confrontation right before discussing the history of the confrontation right. It then considers a range of issues that may arise in any jurisdiction (or in some cases, any common law jurisdiction) with regard to the confrontation right, using as a touchstone the current status of the right in the United States. In particular, it describes situations in which the question of whether a statement is testimonial typically arises, such as fresh …

Criminal Law And Procedure, Aaron J. Campbell

University of Richmond Law Review

This article aims to give a succinct review of notable criminal

law and procedure cases decided by the Supreme Court of Virginia

and the Court of Appeals of Virginia during the past year. Instead

of covering every ruling or rationale in these cases, the article

focuses on the "take-away" of the holdings with the most

precedential value. The article also summarizes noteworthy

changes to criminal law and procedure enacted by the 2017 Virginia

General Assembly.

"Sweet Childish Days": Using Developmental Psychology Research In Evaluating The Admissibility Of Out-Of-Court Statements By Young Children, Lynn Mclain

Maine Law Review

Young children are frequently precluded from testifying at trial on the grounds of incompetency because they cannot answer questions about abstract concepts regarding “truth” and “lies.” In this situation, should the child’s earlier, out-of-court statements disclosing the abuse and identifying the abuser also be inadmissible? The stakes are huge. If young children cannot testify, and their out-of-court statements are precluded, they simply become safe prey, unprotected by the judicial system. The pivotal question becomes, are there procedures that can ensure fairness both to children and to their alleged abusers? This article argues that a child’s testimonial incapacity at trial ought …

Juror Assessment Of Certainty About Firearms Identification Evidence, Sarah L. Cooper, Paraic Scanlon

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Crawford's Last Stand? What Melendez-Diaz V. Massachusetts Means For The Confrontation Clause And For Criminal Trials, Elizabeth Stevens

ConLawNOW

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts heralds a dramatic change for Confrontation Clause jurisprudence and for most criminal trials. Crawford v. Washington held that “testimonial” statements were admissible only if the accused had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the witness. Melendez-Diaz applied this rule to forensic evidence, holding that certificates of analysis – used in a drug trail to prove the nature and weight of the proscribed substances, and sworn to and signed by the analysts who performed the tests – are testimonial.

This article analyzes Melendez-Diaz’s implications for the Court’s Confrontation Clause jurisprudence and for the …

Bill Cosby, The Lustful Disposition Exception, And The Doctrine Of Chances, Wesley Oliver

Wesley M Oliver

Legal Beagle's Blog Archive For November 2015, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Law Library Newsletters/Blog

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law And Procedure, Aaron J. Campbell

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Probative Value Of Testimony From The Hypnotically Refreshed Recollection, Kevin L. Pelanda

Akron Law Review

"The experience of the last three centuries of judicial trials has demonstrated that in disputed issues one cannot depend upon the mere assertion of anybody, however plausible, without scrutiny into its basis." The recent increase in the use of hypnotic memory enhancement on the victims and witnesses of crimes, as well as on defendants' and plaintiffs' witnesses, necessitates an in-depth examination of the reliability of hypnosis as a basis for testimony or statements of persons who are speaking from a hypno-enhanced recollection. Such an examination of hypnosis reveals that hypnotically enhanced memories are likely to be fraught with fantasized and …

State V. Sorenson: The Adequacy Of The Residual Exceptions In Child Sexual Abuse Cases: Five-Part Test Puts An End To The Criticism, Robert G. Renis

Akron Law Review

In State v. Sorenson, a seven-year-old girl's father and uncle had sexual intercourse with her. The court allowed a social worker to testify as to what the girl had told her. Finally, a court has set forth a detailed test for use in determining the admissibility of hearsay evidence in child sexual abuse cases. This casenote will analyze the court's five-part test, and discuss how it was applied in Sorenson. The casenote will then compare the Sorenson test (used in conjunction with the residual exceptions) to statutes providing for specific hearsay exceptions in child sexual abuse cases.

Immigrant Victims, Immigrant Accusers, Michael Kagan

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The U visa program provides immigration status to noncitizen victims of crime, ensuring unauthorized immigrants do not become easy prey because they are too afraid to seek help from the police. But under the federal government’s structuring of the U visa program, a victim must also become an accuser to receive immigration benefits. Thus, the U visa implicates the rights of third parties: accused defendants. These defendants are often immigrants themselves who may be deported when U visa recipients level their accusations. Recent state court decisions have created complications in the program by permitting defendants to cross-examine accusers about their …

Systemic Lying, Julia Simon-Kerr

William & Mary Law Review

This Article offers the foundational account of systemic lying from a definitional and theoretical perspective. Systemic lying involves the cooperation of multiple actors in the legal system who lie or violate their oaths across cases for a consistent reason that is linked to their conception of justice. It becomes a functioning mechanism within the legal system and changes the operation of the law as written. By identifying systemic lying, this Article challenges the assumption that all lying in the legal system is the same. It argues that systemic lying poses a particular threat to the legal system. This means that …

Diagnosis Dangerous: Why State Licensing Boards Should Step In To Prevent Mental Health Practitioners From Speculating Beyond The Scope Of Professional Standards, Jennifer S. Bard

Utah Law Review

This Article reviews the use of mental health experts to provide testimony on the future dangerousness of individuals who have already been convicted of a crime that qualifies them for the death penalty. Although this practice is common in many states that still retain the death penalty, it most frequently occurs in Texas because of a statute that makes it mandatory for juries to determine the future dangerousness of the defendant they have just found guilty. Both the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association have protested the use of mental health professionals in this setting because there are …

Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Paul, Adam D'Antonio

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Virginia's Gap Between Punishment And Culpability: Re-Examining Self-Defense Law And Battered Women's Syndrome, Kendall Hamilton

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Some Thoughts On The Fundamentals Of An Evidence Code From The U.S. American Perspective, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In the U.S. American trial system proof mainly consists of live witnesses presented in open court under oath before the judge, jury, and parties, subject to perjury laws. Cross-examination of the witnesses in that setting is the principal (though not the only) form of testing their reliability. It is for these reasons that we have a rule against hearsay (second-hand reporting in court of what someone has said outside of court).

The Admissibility Of Hypnotically Enhanced Testimony In Criminal Trials, Gary Shaw

Gary M. Shaw

No abstract provided.

Confronting The Confrontation Clause: Addressing The Unanswered Question Of Whether Autopsy Reports Are Testimonial Evidence - People V. Hall, Bailey Ince

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Someone Call 911, Crawford Is Dying - People V. Duhs, Caroline Knoepffler

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Witness Recantation Study: Preliminary Findings, Alexandra E. Gross, Samuel R. Gross

Other Publications

In September 2012, the National Registry of Exonerations began a research study of all the cases in our database that involve post-conviction recantations by witnesses or victims. This is the first systematic study of recantations ever conducted. Its purpose is to identify patterns and trends among these cases, with a particular focus on the circumstances that first elicit the false testimony, and on the official reactions to the recantations by judges and other authorities. Our data set includes all the cases in the Registry as of February 28, 2013 – a total of 1,068 cases, 250 of which involve recantations. …

Adult Survivors Of Childhood Sexual Abuse And The Statute Of Limitations: The Need For Consistent Application Of The Delayed Discovery Rule, Gregory G. Gordon

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Substance And Method In The Year 2000, Akhil Reed Amar

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Decline Of The Confrontation Clause In New York - People V. Encarnacion, Anthony Fasano

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Turn-Coat Disclosure: The Importance Of Following Procedure - Turturro V. City Of New York, Brittany A. Fiorenza

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.