Law Commons^™

Evidence In A Difference Voice: Some Thoughts On Professor Jonakait's Critique Of A Feminist Approach, Aviva Orenstein

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

"My God!" Is This How A Feminist Analyzes Excited Utterances, Randolph N. Jonakait

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Evidence, Marc T. Treadwell

Mercer Law Review

The survey period saw a number of cases raising significant evidentiary issues but no startling developments. Two areas in particular should be noted. As suggested in last year's survey, lawyers engaged in civil litigation should continue to be aware of decisions addressing the admissibility of collateral source payments and the remedies available when a party improperly injects the issue of collateral source payments. All trial lawyers, especially those engaged in criminal practice, should take note of the continued evolution of the "necessity" exception to the hearsay rule.

Perhaps the most striking development came not from the appellate courts but rather …

The Epistemology Of Admissibility: Why Even Good Philosophy Of Science Would Not Make For Good Philosophy Of Evidence, Brian Leiter

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Went Wrong With Fre Rule 609: A Look At How Jurors Really Misuse Prior Conviction Evidence, Robert D. Dodson

North Carolina Central Law Review

No abstract provided.

Beating The Prisoner At Prisoner's Dilemma: The Evidentiary Value Of A Witness's Refusal To Testify , Russell Dean Covey

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Expert Witnesses Under Rules 703 And 803(4) Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence: Separating The Wheat From The Chaff, L. Timothy Perrin

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Mental Health Experts On Trial: Free Will And Determinism In The Courtroom, Ronald J. Rychlak, Joseph F. Rychlak

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Allocating The Burden Of Proof, Bruce L. Hay

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Prior Bad Acts And Two Bad Rules: The Fundamental Unfairness Of Federal Rules Of Evidence 413 And 414, Jason L. Mccandless

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This note presents a Due Process analysis of Federal Rules of Evidence 413 and 414. These rules, which took effect in July 1995, overturn the exclusionary requirements of Rule 404 exclusively in cases involving sexual assault and child molestation. The new rules allow similar crimes to serve as evidence for purposes other than those stated in Rule 404(b). Now, federal prosecutors may offer evidence of a defendant's prior uncharged sexual misconduct to demonstrate that the defendant committed the sex offense for which he currently is being charged. Rules 413 and 414 reevaluate the historic concern that evidence of prior acts …

A Misapplication Of Daubert: Compton V. Subaru Of America Opens The Gate For Unreliable And Irrelevant Expert Testimony, Jonathan R. Schofield

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Glide Path To An "Inclusionary Rule": How Expansion Of The Good Faith Exception Threatens To Fundamentally Change The Exclusionary Rule, James P. Fleissner

Mercer Law Review

During recent political debates over the federal budget deficit, it became fashionable to speak of a "glide path" to a balanced budget. Advocates of a budget plan would plan certain tax rates and spending limits, factor in a set of economic assumptions, and graph a swooping path of declining deficits over several years. Needless to say, that sort of exercise in prediction does not involve the sort of odds that would inspire confidence in a gambler. The accuracy of the beguiling graph, of course, depends on whether tax and spending commitments are kept and whether a host of economic assumptions …

Posado And The Polygraph: The Truth Behind Post-Daubert Deception Detection, Jeffrey Philip Ouellet

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Between Rock And A Hard Place: The Right To Testify And Impeachment By Prior Conviction, Alan D. Hornstein

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Spoliation Of Evidence In Illinois: The Law After Boyd V. Traveler's Insurance Co., Margaret O'Mara Frossard Hon., Neal S. Gainsberg

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Felton V. Felton: A Case Study , James Wilsman

Cleveland State Law Review

The Felton decision ends years of conflict among Ohio's Appellate Districts as to whether or not the higher burden of proof of "clear and convincing evidence" is required in domestic violence cases. This article discusses the issue of whether the court inadvertently violated the constitutional rights of those individuals accused of committing acts of domestic violence. The author suggests that by abrogating the need for corroborating evidence, the Court has, in effect, made it difficult for those individuals who are innocent from protecting themselves against false allegations. Part II discusses the Felton case, while Part III briefly walks through the …

The Proper Test For Assessing The Admissibility Of Nonscientific Expert Evidence Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 702, 1997 John M. Manos Writing Competition On Evidence , Peter B. Oh

Cleveland State Law Review

Courts have fashioned various common law standards to determine the admissibility of nonscientific expert evidence. This Article examines these different standards to evince the need for harmony. Part I of this article examines the admissibility tests for nonscientific expert evidence administered by federal courts before Federal Rule of Evidence 702. The first such test appears in Frye v. United States, which establishes only expert knowledge based on a method or principle that has gained sufficient "general acceptance" can be admitted. Part I concludes by discussing the problems that plague these different applied tests and beckon for a single standard. Part …

The Character Evidence Defense: Acquittal Based On Good Character, Thomas J. Reed

Cleveland State Law Review

This article centers on the case of United States v. Martinez, the only recent case in which an accused was acquitted on the ground of good moral character. Martinez illustrates the powerful effect of a good character evidence defense that showed the accused led a blameless life before being inveigled into drug courier service by an intimidating DEA informer. This article begins with a brief review of United States v. Martinez. Following a presentation of this case, the article shifts focus to examine what our sister discipline of psychology can tell us about human personality and the cross-situational stability of …

Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege: A Rational Approach To Defining Psychotherapist, The 1997 John M. Manos Writing Competition On Evidence, Kathleen M. Maynard

Cleveland State Law Review

In the recently decided case of Jaffee v. Redmond, the United States Supreme Court acknowledged the existence of a psychotherapist-patient privilege under Federal Rule of Evidence 501 for the first time. This Article will make recommendations to lower federal courts that must construe the meaning of "psychotherapist." Part II will provide an overview of federal psychotherapist-patient privilege law prior to Jaffee. Part III will discuss the Court's decision to expand the definition of "psychotherapist" based upon the increased demand for therapy among lower income Americans. Part IV will make three arguments explaining why lower federal courts are free to extend …

Linking Genes With Behavior: The Social And Legal Implications Of Using Genetic Evidence In Criminal Trials, Carol A. Gaudet

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Note surveys the increasingly problematic issue of using genetic information in legal decision making. This Note concludes that genetic evidence should be admissible during both the guilt or innocence phases and the penalty phases of criminal trials because it improves the trial process by enhancing juries' understanding of the defendant's intentions during the commission of their crimes.