Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Evidence

PDF

Washington Law Review

1978

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Federal Rules Of Evidence: A Model For Improved Evidentiary Decisionmaking In Washington, Robert H. Aronson Dec 1978

The Federal Rules Of Evidence: A Model For Improved Evidentiary Decisionmaking In Washington, Robert H. Aronson

Washington Law Review

This article discusses the underlying reasons for establishing rules of evidence, defines two unavoidable conflicts encountered in attempting to effectuate the purposes for adopting such rules, suggests that the Federal Rules of Evidence help resolve these conflicts by adhering to several clearly enunciated rationales, and, finally, indicates how the Rules recognize and accommodate important new scientific and social insights on the admissibility of evidence.


The Marital Privileges In Washington Law: Spouse Testimony And Marital Communications, Teresa Virginia Bigelow Dec 1978

The Marital Privileges In Washington Law: Spouse Testimony And Marital Communications, Teresa Virginia Bigelow

Washington Law Review

This comment is an attempt to analyze and clarify Washington marital privilege law. Each privilege is presented against the backdrop of policy rationales. This overview of the privileges is designed to facilitate their use and also to point out the great need for revision of the Washington law. In conclusion, two alternative approaches are presented as models for a revised set of Washington marital privileges.


Proposed Rule Of Evidence 609: Impeachment Of Criminal Defendants By Prior Convictions, D. Joseph Hurson Dec 1978

Proposed Rule Of Evidence 609: Impeachment Of Criminal Defendants By Prior Convictions, D. Joseph Hurson

Washington Law Review

This comment describes current Washington law on the use of criminal convictions to impeach the testimony of criminal defendants and examines the factors which are relevant to the formation of a more acceptable rule. Adoption of the proposed rule would also affect the rules for impeaching nondefendant witnesses. Only a criminal defendant, however, is in jeopardy of actually being convicted as a result of a jury's misuse of evidence of prior convictions. Because the interests of the criminal defendant witness will be so drastically affected by the prior conviction rule which the Washington Supreme Court ultimately adopts, this comment will …


Women's Self-Defense Under Washington Law—State V. Wanrow, 88 Wn. 2d 221, 559 P.2d 548 (1977), Jennifer Marsh Dec 1978

Women's Self-Defense Under Washington Law—State V. Wanrow, 88 Wn. 2d 221, 559 P.2d 548 (1977), Jennifer Marsh

Washington Law Review

The Washington Supreme Court, in State v. Wanrow, examined the issue of self-defense for women under Washington law and held that the application of traditional self-defense rules resulted in prejudicial treatment of women defendants. This note will examine the meaning of the Wanrow decision and offer support for its holding in light of available psychological and sociological data. Additionally, this note will suggest a special analytical framework utilizing social science data to test accepted legal doctrines for latent sex discrimination. The importance of these data in exposing such discrimination will be shown by examining related cases in the area of …


Elimination Of The Agency Fiction In The Vicarious Admissions Exception, Norman B. Page Dec 1978

Elimination Of The Agency Fiction In The Vicarious Admissions Exception, Norman B. Page

Washington Law Review

This note will compare the Washington courts' application of the common law vicarious admissions exception to the broad rule embodied in Federal Rule 801(d)(2)(D). Furthermore, it will identify and analyze the policies upon which the vicarious admissions rule is grounded and will compare the effectiveness of the common law rule and the federal or "broad" rule in fulfilling those policies. It will demonstrate how, in focusing on the substantive law of agency rather than directly on those circumstances which tend to assure a statement's trustworthiness, both rules share a fundamental flaw and, as a result, accomplish only imprecisely the basic …