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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 30 of 51

Full-Text Articles in Law

Assertion And Hearsay, Richard Lloret Jan 2021

Assertion And Hearsay, Richard Lloret

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

This article explores the characteristics and functions of assertion and considers how the term influences the definition of hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801. Rule 801(a) defines hearsay by limiting it to words and conduct intended as an assertion, but the rule does not define the term assertion. Courts and legal scholars have focused relatively little attention on the nature and definition of assertion. That is unfortunate, because assertion is a robust concept that has been the subject of intense philosophic study over recent decades. Assertion is not a mere cypher standing in for whatever speech or conduct one …


Standards Of Review In Texas, W. Wendell Hall, Ryan G. Anderson Nov 2019

Standards Of Review In Texas, W. Wendell Hall, Ryan G. Anderson

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming


"Dirty" Experts: Ethical Challenges Concerning, And A Comparative Perspective On, The Use Of Consulting Experts, David S. Caudill Jul 2018

"Dirty" Experts: Ethical Challenges Concerning, And A Comparative Perspective On, The Use Of Consulting Experts, David S. Caudill

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

U.S. attorneys often hire consulting experts who potentially never get named as testifying experts. The same practice is evident in Australia, where the colloquial distinction is between a “clean” and a “dirty” expert, the latter being in the role of a consultant who is considered a member of the client’s “legal team.” A “clean” expert named as a witness is then called “independent,” signaling that he or she is not an advocate. In contrast to the U.S. discourse concerning consulting and testifying experts, focused on discovery issues, the conversation in Australia betrays immediate ethical concerns that both (i) explain why …


A Step Toward Robust Criminal Discovery Reform In Virginia: The Disclosure Of Witness Statements Before Trial, Jennifer Horan Nov 2017

A Step Toward Robust Criminal Discovery Reform In Virginia: The Disclosure Of Witness Statements Before Trial, Jennifer Horan

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


Juror Assessment Of Certainty About Firearms Identification Evidence, Sarah L. Cooper, Paraic Scanlon Oct 2017

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

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.


Bias In Blue: Instructing Jurors To Consider The Testimony Of Police Officer Witnesses With Caution, Vida B. Johnson Apr 2017

Bias In Blue: Instructing Jurors To Consider The Testimony Of Police Officer Witnesses With Caution, Vida B. Johnson

Pepperdine Law Review

Jurors in criminal trials are instructed by the judge that they are to treat the testimony of a police officer just like the testimony of any other witness. Fact-finders are told that they should not give police officer testimony greater or lesser weight than any other witness they will hear from at trial. Jurors are to accept that police are no more believable or less believable than anyone else. Jury instructions regarding police officer testimony stand in contrast to the instructions given to jurors when a witness with a legally recognized interest in the outcome of the case has testified. …


Innocent Suffering: The Unavailability Of Post-Conviction Relief In Virginia Courts, Kaitlyn Potter Nov 2016

Innocent Suffering: The Unavailability Of Post-Conviction Relief In Virginia Courts, Kaitlyn Potter

University of Richmond Law Review

This comment examines actual innocence in Virginia: the progress it has made, the problems it still faces, and the possibilities for reform. Part I addresses past reform to the system, spurred by the shocking tales of Thomas Haynesworth and others. Part II identifies three of the most prevalent systemic challenges marring Virginia's justice system: (1) flawed scientific evidence; (2) the premature destruction of evidence; and (3) false confessions and guilty pleas. Part III suggests ways in which Virginia can, and should, address these challenges to ensure that the justice system is actually serving justice.


Billy Joel: The Minstrel Testifies Or How The Rules Of Evidence Handcuff The Piano Man, Hon. Richard A. Dollinger Apr 2016

Billy Joel: The Minstrel Testifies Or How The Rules Of Evidence Handcuff The Piano Man, Hon. Richard A. Dollinger

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Paul, Adam D'Antonio Nov 2014

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

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Confronting The Confrontation Clause: Addressing The Unanswered Question Of Whether Autopsy Reports Are Testimonial Evidence - People V. Hall, Bailey Ince Mar 2013

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.


Substance And Method In The Year 2000, Akhil Reed Amar Oct 2012

Substance And Method In The Year 2000, Akhil Reed Amar

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.


Experience-Based Opinion Testimony: Strengthening The Lay Opinion Rule , Anne Bowen Poulin Sep 2012

Experience-Based Opinion Testimony: Strengthening The Lay Opinion Rule , Anne Bowen Poulin

Pepperdine Law Review

Determining whether experience-based opinion should be evaluated as lay or as expert opinion has proven particularly challenging to the courts. The Federal Rules of Evidence were amended in 2000, adopting specific, more stringent requirements for expert testimony and hardening the line between lay and expert opinion. Expert opinion testimony is admissible only if based on reliable methodology, whereas lay opinion must be rationally derived using everyday reasoning. The decisions applying the rules do not strike the right balance in regard to experience-based opinion. Too often, courts either accept claims of experience-based expertise at face value or admit experience-based opinion as …


The Propriety Of Jury Questioning: A Remedy For Perceived Harmless Error, Laurie Forbes Neff Jul 2012

The Propriety Of Jury Questioning: A Remedy For Perceived Harmless Error, Laurie Forbes Neff

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.


Civil Practice And Procedure, Hon. Jane Marum Roush Nov 2009

Civil Practice And Procedure, Hon. Jane Marum Roush

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


Criminal Law And Procedure, Michael T. Judge, Stephen R. Mccullough Nov 2009

Criminal Law And Procedure, Michael T. Judge, Stephen R. Mccullough

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


Reconceiving The Right To Present Witnesses, Richard A. Nagareda Mar 1999

Reconceiving The Right To Present Witnesses, Richard A. Nagareda

Michigan Law Review

Modem American law is, in a sense, a system of compartments. For understandable curricular reasons, legal education sharply distinguishes the law of evidence from both constitutional law and criminal procedure. In fact, the lines of demarcation between these three subjects extend well beyond law school to the organization of the leading treatises and case headnotes to which practicing lawyers routinely refer in their trade. Many of the most interesting questions in the law, however, do not rest squarely within a single compartment; instead, they concern the content and legitimacy of the lines of demarcation themselves. This article explores a significant, …


Rule 607: Who May Impeach Jan 1996

Rule 607: Who May Impeach

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 405: Methods Of Proving Character Jan 1996

Rule 405: Methods Of Proving Character

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 702: Testimony By Experts Jan 1996

Rule 702: Testimony By Experts

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 803(3): Then Existing Mental, Emotional, Or Physical Condition Jan 1996

Rule 803(3): Then Existing Mental, Emotional, Or Physical Condition

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 803(4): Statements For Purposes Of Medical Diagnosis Or Treatment Jan 1996

Rule 803(4): Statements For Purposes Of Medical Diagnosis Or Treatment

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 803(18): Learned Treatises Jan 1996

Rule 803(18): Learned Treatises

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 804(B)(1): Former Testimony Jan 1996

Rule 804(B)(1): Former Testimony

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 803(1): Present Sense Impression Jan 1996

Rule 803(1): Present Sense Impression

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 803(8)(C): Public Records And Reports Jan 1996

Rule 803(8)(C): Public Records And Reports

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 601: General Rule Of Competency Jan 1996

Rule 601: General Rule Of Competency

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 801(D)(1): Prior Statement By Witness Jan 1996

Rule 801(D)(1): Prior Statement By Witness

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 901: Requirement Of Authentication Or Identification Jan 1996

Rule 901: Requirement Of Authentication Or Identification

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Expert Testimony, Barry C. Scheck Jan 1994

Expert Testimony, Barry C. Scheck

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Trances, Trials, And Tribulations, Gary M. Shaw Jan 1994

Trances, Trials, And Tribulations, Gary M. Shaw

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.