Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (11)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (9)
- Pepperdine University (3)
- Cleveland State University (2)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (2)
-
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- Cornell University Law School (1)
- Marquette University Law School (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- University of Baltimore Law (1)
- University of Georgia School of Law (1)
- University of Maine School of Law (1)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (1)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (9)
- Michigan Law Review (6)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (4)
- Cleveland State Law Review (2)
- Indiana Law Journal (2)
-
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (2)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (1)
- Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy (1)
- Georgia Criminal Law Review (1)
- Maine Law Review (1)
- Marquette Law Review (1)
- Michigan Journal of Gender & Law (1)
- Pepperdine Law Review (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (1)
- University of Baltimore Law Forum (1)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (1)
- Villanova Law Review (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 36
Full-Text Articles in Law
"Hired Guns": Establishing The Scope Of The Proper Cross-Examination And Argument Relating To Expert Witness' Compensation In Criminal Trials, Michael C. Kovac
"Hired Guns": Establishing The Scope Of The Proper Cross-Examination And Argument Relating To Expert Witness' Compensation In Criminal Trials, Michael C. Kovac
Georgia Criminal Law Review
The outcomes of criminal cases can turn on the credibility of the parties’ expert witnesses. The compensation such experts receive in exchange for their work on cases can undermine their credibility, as it provides the experts with a financial incentive that might bias them in favor of the parties who retain them. While concerns with such bias have existed for decades, courts have been inconsistent in the defining the permissible scope of cross-examination and argument on the issue. Some courts have unduly curtailed such cross-examination and argument. Courts have also been inconsistent in their views of whether calling such expert …
"Another Day" Has Dawned: The Maine Supreme Judicial Court Holds Laboratory Evidence Subject To The Confrontation Clause In State V. Mangos, Reid Hayton-Hull
"Another Day" Has Dawned: The Maine Supreme Judicial Court Holds Laboratory Evidence Subject To The Confrontation Clause In State V. Mangos, Reid Hayton-Hull
Maine Law Review
The Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause guarantees criminal defendants the right to “confront witnesses against them.” Specifically, the Clause ensures a criminal defendant's right to confront witnesses who testify against him by the unique medium, or “crucible,” of cross-examination. Although federal and state rules of evidence prohibiting hearsay and the Confrontation Clause are designed to protect similar interests, whether or not admission of a piece of evidence violates a defendant's rights under the Confrontation Clause is a separate analysis than whether that same piece of evidence is admissible under a rule of evidence. In 2004, the United States Supreme Court held …
Cross-Examination, College Sexual-Assault Adjudications, And The Opportunity For Tuning Up The "Greatest Legal Engine Ever Invented", H. Hunter Bruton
Cross-Examination, College Sexual-Assault Adjudications, And The Opportunity For Tuning Up The "Greatest Legal Engine Ever Invented", H. Hunter Bruton
Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy
With its reputation as the "greatest legal engine ever invented" cross-examination rarely receives critical evaluation. This Article seeks to narrow that academic gap and offer pragmatic advice to policymakers and judges considering the in-the-trenches issues of cross-examination. Despite a great body of empirical and interdisciplinary work on cross-examination, legal scholarship often relegates discussion of cross-examination's benefits and costs to an errant footnote or a short paragraph. But cross-examination's efficacy should not be an afterthought or aside to doctrinal exegesis. Answers to the hardest questions about the presence, scope, and format of cross-examination rely on assumptions about the benefits and costs …
Recent Development: Peterson V. State: Limitations On Defense Cross-Examination Are Permitted When The Testimony Lacks A Factual Foundation, Is Overly Prejudicial, Or Has Not Been Adequately Preserved, Meghan E. Ellis
University of Baltimore Law Forum
The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the defendant’s right to confrontation was not violated when the defense was precluded from cross-examining a witness about hallucinations and his potential sentence prior to entering into a plea agreement. Peterson v. State, 444 Md. 105, 153-54, 118 A.3d 925, 952-53 (2015). The court found that the defendant failed to preserve the issue of a witness’s expectation of benefit with respect to pending charges, and failed to show sufficient factual foundation for a cross-examination regarding the expectation. Id. at 138-39, 118 A.3d at 944. In addition, the court found that, although not …
The Ethical Limits Of Discrediting The Truthful Witness: How Modern Ethics Rules Fail To Prevent Truthful Witnesses From Being Discredited Through Unethical Means, Todd A. Berger
Marquette Law Review
Whether the criminal defense attorney may ethically discredit the truthful witness on cross-examination and later during closing argument has long been an area of controversy in legal ethics. The vast majority of scholarly discussion on this important ethical dilemma has examined it in the abstract, focusing on the defense attorney’s dual roles in a criminal justice system that is dedicated to searching for the truth while simultaneously requiring zealous advocacy even for the guiltiest of defendants. Unlike these previous works, this particular Article explores this dilemma from the perspective of the techniques that criminal defense attorney’s use on cross-examination and …
Surrogate Testimony After Williams: A New Answer To The Question Of Who May Testify Regarding The Contents Of A Laboratory Report, Jennifer Alberts
Surrogate Testimony After Williams: A New Answer To The Question Of Who May Testify Regarding The Contents Of A Laboratory Report, Jennifer Alberts
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court, New York County, People V. Vasquez, Jessica Goodwin
Supreme Court, New York County, People V. Vasquez, Jessica Goodwin
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. Nieves-Andino, Jason Gines
Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. Nieves-Andino, Jason Gines
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Making The Right Call For Confrontation At Felony Sentencing, Shaakirrah R. Sanders
Making The Right Call For Confrontation At Felony Sentencing, Shaakirrah R. Sanders
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Felony sentencing courts have discretion to increase punishment based on un-cross-examined testimonial statements about several categories of uncharged, dismissed, or otherwise unproven criminal conduct. Denying defendants an opportunity to cross-examine these categories of sentencing evidence undermines a core principle of natural law as adopted in the Sixth Amendment: those accused of felony crimes have the right to confront adversarial witnesses. This Article contributes to the scholarship surrounding confrontation rights at felony sentencing by cautioning against continued adherence to the most historic Supreme Court case on this issue, Williams v. New York. This Article does so for reasons beyond the unacknowledged …
Sweet Caroline: The Backslide From Federal Rule Of Evidence 613(B) To The Rule In Queen Caroline's Case, Katharine T. Schaffzin
Sweet Caroline: The Backslide From Federal Rule Of Evidence 613(B) To The Rule In Queen Caroline's Case, Katharine T. Schaffzin
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Since 1975, Rule 613(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence has governed the admission of extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement in federal court. Rule 613(b) requires the proponent of the prior inconsistent statement to provide the declarant an opportunity to explain or deny it. There is no requirement that the proponent provide that opportunity at any particular time or in any particular sequence. Rule 613 reflected a change from the common law that had fallen out of fashion in the federal courts. That common law rule, known as the Rule in Queen Caroline’s Case, required the proponent of …
The Right To Cross-Examine Physicians In Social Security Disability Cases, Victor G. Rosenblum
The Right To Cross-Examine Physicians In Social Security Disability Cases, Victor G. Rosenblum
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
This Article examines the alternative readings and rationales of Richardson v. Perales regarding the cross-examination of reporting physicians in social security disability claim hearings. First, Part II compares the Sixth and Second Circuit's interpretation of the Perales rule, which supports the SSA's regulation and interpretation, to the Fifth Circuit's interpretation, which explicitly proclaims cross-examination, once duly requested, to be an absolute right. Part III questions whether the Perales Court's declaration that the SSA is “an [impartial] adjudicator and not . . . an advocate or adversary” remains empirically valid. Part IV discusses the SSA's recent assertions of management prerogatives that …
Someone Call 911, Crawford Is Dying - People V. Duhs, Caroline Knoepffler
Someone Call 911, Crawford Is Dying - People V. Duhs, Caroline Knoepffler
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
There But For The Grace Of God Go I: The Right Of Cross-Examination In Social Security Disability Hearings , Bradley S. Dixon
There But For The Grace Of God Go I: The Right Of Cross-Examination In Social Security Disability Hearings , Bradley S. Dixon
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Turn-Coat Disclosure: The Importance Of Following Procedure - Turturro V. City Of New York, Brittany A. Fiorenza
Turn-Coat Disclosure: The Importance Of Following Procedure - Turturro V. City Of New York, Brittany A. Fiorenza
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Accomplice Confessions And The Confrontation Clause: Crawford V. Washington Confronts Past Issues With A New Rule, Kjirstin Graham
Accomplice Confessions And The Confrontation Clause: Crawford V. Washington Confronts Past Issues With A New Rule, Kjirstin Graham
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Impeachment Methods Illustrated: Movies, Novels, And High Profile Cases, Martin A. Schwartz, John Nicodemo
Impeachment Methods Illustrated: Movies, Novels, And High Profile Cases, Martin A. Schwartz, John Nicodemo
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Confrontation And Domestic Violence Post-Davis: Is There And Should There Be A Doctrinal Exception, Eleanor Simon
Confrontation And Domestic Violence Post-Davis: Is There And Should There Be A Doctrinal Exception, Eleanor Simon
Michigan Journal of Gender & Law
Close to five million intimate partner rapes and physical assaults are perpetrated against women in the United States annually. Domestic violence accounts for twenty percent of all non-fatal crime experienced by women in this county. Despite these statistics, many have argued that in the past six years the Supreme Court has "put a target on [the] back" of the domestic violence victim, has "significantly eroded offender accountability in domestic violence prosecutions," and has directly instigated a substantial decline in domestic violence prosecutions. The asserted cause is the Court's complete and groundbreaking re-conceptualization of the Sixth Amendment right of a criminal …
Melendez-Diaz And The Right To Confrontation, Craig M. Bradley
Melendez-Diaz And The Right To Confrontation, Craig M. Bradley
Chicago-Kent Law Review
In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court overruled Ohio v. Roberts and adopted new law concerning the use of hearsay testimony at criminal trials. This was based on the Sixth Amendment's command that "In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him .. " On its face this provision seems to say that the accused has the right to cross-examine anybody who testifies for the prosecution at trial, whether as a live witness or through hearsay. The Supreme Court acknowledged much of this in Crawford, but …
"An Opportunity For Effective Cross-Examination": Limits On The Confrontation Right Of The Pro Se Defendant, Alanna Clair
"An Opportunity For Effective Cross-Examination": Limits On The Confrontation Right Of The Pro Se Defendant, Alanna Clair
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The rights of a defendant to confront his accusers and conduct his defense without the assistance of counsel are sacrosanct in the American judicial system. The rights of the defendant are even sometimes exalted at the expense of the rights of the public or of victims of crime. This Note examines the problem of a pro se defendant using his confrontation right to intimidate or harass his alleged victims testifying against him. It is well-established that the confrontation right is not unconditional. The problem comes in determining whether the courts can place limits on the confrontation right of a pro …
Expertise In Action: Presenting And Attacking Expert Evidence In Dna Fingerprinting Cases, Michael Lynch
Expertise In Action: Presenting And Attacking Expert Evidence In Dna Fingerprinting Cases, Michael Lynch
Villanova Law Review
No abstract provided.
Evidence—Sixth Amendment And The Confrontation Clause—Testimonial Trumps Reliable: The United States Supreme Court Reconsiders Its Approach To The Confrontation Clause. Crawford V. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004)., Kristen Sluyter
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Proposed Amendments To Fed. R. Crim. P. 26: An Exchange: Remote Testimony - A Prosecutor's Perspective, Lynn Helland
Proposed Amendments To Fed. R. Crim. P. 26: An Exchange: Remote Testimony - A Prosecutor's Perspective, Lynn Helland
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Although the Supreme Court has declined, for now, to endorse the Judicial Conference proposal to add a Rule 26(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to permit live video testimony under limited circumstances, I agree with Professor Friedman that the matter is far from over. This is both because the potential benefits to be realized from the use of remote video testimony are too large to ignore and because, on closer inspection, any Confrontation Clause concerns that might underlie the Court's hesitation to adopt the proposal are not warranted. My purpose in writing is to summarize some of the …
Rule 405: Methods Of Proving Character
Rule 803(18): Learned Treatises
Rule 801(D)(1): Prior Statement By Witness
A Comparison Of The Federal And New York State Rape Shield Statutes, Deborah Stavile Bartel
A Comparison Of The Federal And New York State Rape Shield Statutes, Deborah Stavile Bartel
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Practical Approach To The Use Of Expert Testimony, Irving Younger
A Practical Approach To The Use Of Expert Testimony, Irving Younger
Cleveland State Law Review
I will raise the questions that a lawyer is likely to put to himself when preparing a case involving expert witnesses, followed by an explanation of how to deal with the expert witness in court. After raising particular issues, I will sketch out the answer that you will find, and since we need to look at some particular jurisdiction, I will pay attention to the federal jurisdiction and the twenty or so states that have enacted the Federal Rules of Evidence. Then, by way of contrast, I will refer to some New York cases, simply because first, I know them …
Impeaching The Professional Expert Witness By A Showing Of Financial Interest, Michael H. Graham
Impeaching The Professional Expert Witness By A Showing Of Financial Interest, Michael H. Graham
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Securing, Examining, And Cross-Examining Expert Witnesses In Environmental Cases, David Sive
Securing, Examining, And Cross-Examining Expert Witnesses In Environmental Cases, David Sive
Michigan Law Review
It is necessary at the outset to define the scope of the problem with which this Article will deal. Environmental cases are litigated in both judicial and administrative tribunals. The judicial proceedings include plenary actions and special proceedings and are heard in both federal and state courts. The administrative proceedings include licensing proceedings before federal agencies such as the Federal Power Commission and Atomic Energy Commission. Whether such administrative proceedings are deemed quasi-judicial or not, they are within the scope of this Article so long as they are adversary and involve testimony under oath, examination and cross-examination of witnesses, a …
Rights Of Persons Compelled To Appear In Federal Agency Investigational Hearings, David C. Murchison
Rights Of Persons Compelled To Appear In Federal Agency Investigational Hearings, David C. Murchison
Michigan Law Review
By statutes designed to protect the public interest, many federal administrative agencies-such as the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Civil Aeronautics Board-are granted authority to conduct investigations dealing with substantive matters committed to their respective jurisdictions. In an increasing number of instances, these agencies are empowered to utilize compulsory process; persons may be ordered to appear and give testimony or to produce documents in so-called investigational hearings, subject to criminal sanctions for noncompliance. The use of investigational hearings by these agencies as an ancillary law enforcement tool …