Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (8)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (5)
- Cleveland State University (4)
- William & Mary Law School (3)
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
-
- Brigham Young University Law School (2)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (2)
- Mercer University School of Law (2)
- UC Law SF (2)
- University of Georgia School of Law (2)
- Brooklyn Law School (1)
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law (1)
- Florida International University College of Law (1)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- Georgetown University Law Center (1)
- Loyola University Chicago, School of Law (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- North Carolina Central University School of Law (1)
- Selected Works (1)
- University of Colorado Law School (1)
- University of Kentucky (1)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (1)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (1)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (1)
- West Virginia University (1)
- Keyword
-
- Evidence (8)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (5)
- Certainty (3)
- Expert evidence (3)
- Persuasion (3)
-
- Probability (3)
- Testimony (3)
- Cross-examination (2)
- Excited utterance exception (2)
- Feminist Jurisprudence (2)
- Feminist legal theory (2)
- Hearsay rule (2)
- Jaffee v. Redmond (2)
- Proof (2)
- Psychology (2)
- Trial advocacy (2)
- Women (2)
- Admissibility (1)
- Admissibility tests for nonscientific expert evidence (1)
- Affirmative consent (1)
- Allen (Ronald J.) (1)
- Alternative Allocations (1)
- Anecdotes (1)
- Assumption of risk (1)
- Attorney-Client Privilege (1)
- Auxiliary Evidence (1)
- Bayes Theroem (1)
- Bayesian reasoning (1)
- Behavioralism (1)
- Burden of Proof (1)
- Publication
-
- Articles (8)
- Cleveland State Law Review (4)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (3)
- Faculty Scholarship (3)
- BYU Law Review (2)
-
- Faculty Publications (2)
- Indiana Law Journal (2)
- Katharine K. Baker (2)
- Mercer Law Review (2)
- Scholarly Works (2)
- William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice (2)
- American University Law Review (1)
- Articles & Chapters (1)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (1)
- Faculty Works (1)
- Fordham Urban Law Journal (1)
- John J. Capowski (1)
- LLM Theses and Essays (1)
- Law Faculty Scholarly Articles (1)
- Loyola University Chicago Law Journal (1)
- North Carolina Central Law Review (1)
- Publications (1)
- U.S. Supreme Court Briefs (1)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (1)
- Villanova Law Review (1)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (1)
- West Virginia Law Review (1)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 49 of 49
Full-Text Articles in Law
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 …
"My God!": A Feminist Critique Of The Excited Utterance Exception To The Hearsay Rule, Aviva A. Orenstein
"My God!": A Feminist Critique Of The Excited Utterance Exception To The Hearsay Rule, Aviva A. Orenstein
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
The Character Evidence Defense: Acquittal Based On Good Character, Thomas J. Reed
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
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 …
The In/Into Controversy: Lubet Misses The Point, J. Alexander Tanford
The In/Into Controversy: Lubet Misses The Point, J. Alexander Tanford
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
Pink Elephants In The Rape Trial: The Problem Of Tort-Type Defenses In The Criminal Law Of Rape, Aya Gruber
Pink Elephants In The Rape Trial: The Problem Of Tort-Type Defenses In The Criminal Law Of Rape, Aya Gruber
Publications
No abstract provided.
Irrelevance, Minimal Relevance, And Meta-Relevance (Response To David Crump), Richard D. Friedman
Irrelevance, Minimal Relevance, And Meta-Relevance (Response To David Crump), Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Professor Crump's analysis runs the full traverse from academic theorizing to practical observation. I will attempt to follow him over the same course, addressing three questions among the congeries that he raises. First, is it true that all evidence satisfies the minimalist definition of relevance? Second, should evidentiary codes include a tighter definition of relevance? Third, how should we assess lawyers' use of evidence that, loosely speaking, is irrelevant?
Evidence In A Different Voice: Some Thoughts On Professor Jonakait's Critique Of A Feminist Approach, Aviva A. Orenstein
Evidence In A Different Voice: Some Thoughts On Professor Jonakait's Critique Of A Feminist Approach, Aviva A. Orenstein
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
Linking Genes With Behavior: The Social And Legal Implications Of Using Genetic Evidence In Criminal Trials, Carol A. Gaudet
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.
The Assessment Of Expertise: Transcending Construction, Randolph N. Jonakait
The Assessment Of Expertise: Transcending Construction, Randolph N. Jonakait
Articles & Chapters
No abstract provided.
Hearsay Evidence: A Comparison Of Two Jurisdictions: United States And Nigeria, Lawrence Okechukwu Azubuike
Hearsay Evidence: A Comparison Of Two Jurisdictions: United States And Nigeria, Lawrence Okechukwu Azubuike
LLM Theses and Essays
Many jurisdictions have detailed rules of evidence which regulate the facts that are admissible in court. The hearsay rule is one such rule which excludes certain evidence. The hearsay rule has roots in an old common law principle and is featured in many jurisdictions today, but has endured heavy criticisms over time. This paper examines the application of the hearsay rule in the United States and in Nigeria. Both are common law countries, however, the United States’ legal system is more advanced than that of Nigeria. This comparison aims to inform and assist current reform efforts in Nigeria.
Dealing With Evidentiary Deficiency, Richard D. Friedman
Dealing With Evidentiary Deficiency, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Lack of information distorts litigation. Claims or defenses that a party might prove easily, or that might even be undisputed, in a world of perfect information can be difficult or impossible to prove in the real world of imperfect information. Some information deficiencies are inevitable, at least in the sense that we could not eliminate them without incurring undue social costs. In some cases, however, a person's conduct may have caused the deficiency. More generally, the person may have had available a reasonable alternative course of conduct that would have eliminated, or at least mitigated, the deficiency. Ariel Porat and …
Crime, Politics, And Race (Symposium: Justice And The Criminal Justice Process), Samuel R. Gross
Crime, Politics, And Race (Symposium: Justice And The Criminal Justice Process), Samuel R. Gross
Articles
The biggest problem with the criminal justice system is that too many crimes are committed-too many rapes, too many murders, too many robberies; too much violence that inflicts an untold amount of suffering and destruction on too many people. If that seems obvious, what follows should be equally obvious. The most important step to take to solve the problems of the criminal justice system is to reduce the number of crimes that are committed: to prevent crimes. The best thing we can do to help the victims of crime is to keep them from becoming victims in the first place. …
Towards A (Bayesian) Convergence?, Richard D. Friedman
Towards A (Bayesian) Convergence?, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
If I understand them correctly, several leading Bayesioskeptics (Allen, Callen, Stein) acknowledge - with varying degrees of specificity and varying degrees of grudgingness - that standard probability theory can be useful as an analytical tool in considering evidentiary doctrines and the probative value of evidentiary items.
Answering The Bayesioskeptical Challenge, Richard D. Friedman
Answering The Bayesioskeptical Challenge, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
In recent years, some scholars of evidence, myself among them, have made active use of subjective probability theory - what is sometimes referred to as Bayesianism - in thinking about issues and problems related to the law of evidence. But, at the same time, this use has been challenged to various degrees and in various ways by scholars to whom I shall apply the collective, if somewhat misleading, label of Bayesioskeptics. I present this brief paper to defend this use of probability theory, and to discuss what I believe is its proper role in discourse about evidentiary issues.
Confrontation And The Definition Of Chutzpa, Richard D. Friedman
Confrontation And The Definition Of Chutzpa, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
You may know the standard illustration of chutzpa - the man who kills both his parents and then begs the sentencing court to have mercy on an orphan. In this article, I discuss a case of chutzpa that is nearly as outlandish - the criminal defendant who, having rendered his victim unavailable to testify, contends that evidence of the victim's statement should not be admitted against him because to do so would violate his right to confront her. I contend that in a case like this the defendant should be deemed to have forfeited the confrontation right. On the same …
Appellate Review Of Scientific Evidence Under Daubert And Joiner, David L. Faigman
Appellate Review Of Scientific Evidence Under Daubert And Joiner, David L. Faigman
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Issues Once Moot: The Other Evidentiary Objections To The Admission Of Exculpatory Polygraph Examinations, James R. Mccall
Issues Once Moot: The Other Evidentiary Objections To The Admission Of Exculpatory Polygraph Examinations, James R. Mccall
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Statements Against Interest, Reliability, And The Confrontation Clause, John J. Capowski
Statements Against Interest, Reliability, And The Confrontation Clause, John J. Capowski
John J. Capowski
No abstract provided.