Law Commons^™

The History Of Forensic-Science Evidence In Criminal Trials And The Role Of Early “Success” In Establishing Its Putative Reliability, Carrie Leonetti

St. Mary's Law Journal

This Article posits the history of forensic-science evidence plays a significant role in the unquestioning manner of its modern acceptance. It traces early high-profile forensic science “successes” and the public reactions to them. It argues the public perception of the “advances” of forensic science continues to play a role in the lack of scrutiny given to these disciplines in admissibility decisions today. It concludes, when it comes to forensic science, history should play a different role by serving as a critical warning rather than a congratulatory buttress.

Revealing Realities Hidden Behind The Curtain Of Subjective Syndromes: The Seventh Circuit Changes The Narrative Around Expert Evidence On Battered Woman Syndrome In United States V. Dingwall, Keane Brazda

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Race Ethics: Colorblind Formalism And Color-Coded Pragmatism In Lawyer Regulation, Anthony V. Alfieri

Articles

The recent, high-profile civil and criminal trials held in the aftermath of the George Floyd and Ahmaud Arbery murders, the Kyle Rittenhouse killings, and the Charlottesville "Unite the Right" Rally violence renew debate over race, representation, and ethics in the U.S. civil and criminal justice systems. For civil rights lawyers, prosecutors, and criminal defense attorneys, neither the progress of post-war civil rights movements and criminal justice reform campaigns nor the advance of Critical Race Theory and social movement scholarship have resolved the debate over the use of race in pretrial, trial, and appellate advocacy, and in the lawyering process more …

Introduction: The Arc Of Race In Professional And Collegiate Sports Symposium, Kenneth D. Ferguson

Faculty Works

This introduction will highlight the five articles featured in the symposium issue of the UMKC Law Review and will also situate those articles in the Sports Law Symposium titled, The Arc of Race in Professional and Collegiate Sports. The goal of the two-day virtual symposium was to bring together leading legal, social science, and medical science scholars to engage in discourse concerning how race and gender have affected and continue to influence decision making in professional and collegiate sports. The symposium exposed how race, culture, ethnicity, and gender affect a wide range of phenomena in scientific fields such as neuropsychological …

Remarks On Manifesting Justice: Wrongly Convicted Women Reclaim Their Rights, Amber Baylor, Valena Beety, Susan Sturm

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The following are remarks from a panel discussion co-hosted by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Center for Gender and Sexuality Law on the book Manifesting Justice: Wrongly Convicted Women Reclaim Their Rights.

Flip The Switch: Swapping The Socratic Method For Applied Learning In Evidence Law 646, Chelsi Hayden

UNL Faculty Course Portfolios

This course portfolio documents my evaluation of my teaching methods and student learning in an Evidence law course. My goal was to document positive outcomes associated with applied learning through a flipped course structure. The data, however, suggests that more research is necessary to determine whether there is a strong correlation between a flipped course and student learning. The data suggests students are generally performing as expected in the course. It also indicates that providing lectures and problem sets before class is effective but may not be more effective than providing them in class, suggesting the timing of the lectures …

Fact-Finding Without Rules: Habermas's Communicative Rationality As A Framework For Judicial Assessments Of Digital Open-Source Information, Matthew Gillett

Michigan Journal of International Law

Jürgen Habermas’s theory of “communicative rationality” (also known as “communicative action”) provides a promising conceptual apparatus through which to justify and validate the International Criminal Court’s consideration of the emerging phenomenon of digital open-source information. Because of its process-based and inclusive qualities, Habermas’s communicative rationality is particularly apposite for the dynamic nature of digital open-source information and the heterogenous range of actors and institutions which have relevant experiences and skills to contribute to the generation of norms and determinations regarding its role before the Court. This is important, as the International Criminal Court’s procedural framework is largely silent on digital …

Evidence, W. Randall Bassett, Nikolas L. Volosin

Mercer Law Review

In its 2022 term, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued several opinions on evidence. The opinions covered evidentiary issues ranging from admitting statements by criminal defendants under Miranda, the admission of expert and lay opinion testimony, the use of character evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 404, and the admission of hearsay evidence based on exceptions under Rule 803. The discussion below explores these evidentiary issues and how the Eleventh Circuit addressed them in its 2022 term.

You Shall Not Pass! Georgia Court Of Appeals Narrows The Admissibility Of Prior Acts Character Evidence Under Georgia Evidence Rule 404(B), Hannah Farthing

Mercer Law Review

The common law rules of evidence prohibited the use of a defendant’s “bad character or prior, unrelated misconduct” to show in a criminal trial that the defendant was more likely to have committed the charged crime. Today, however, the accused’s prior crime or prior acts are admissible in trial so long as the evidence is relevant to some issue other than proving the accused acted in accordance with his character. Although the rule manages to keep out entirely unrelated evidence of the accused’s criminal character, many broad exceptions to the rule still lie in place allowing the prosecution to sneak …

Marital Disharmony: Examining The Adverse Spousal Testimonial Privilege And Its Impact In Washington State, Sabrina Suen

Washington Law Review

In Washington State, RCW 5.60.060(1) provides that “[a] spouse or domestic partner shall not be examined for or against his or her spouse or domestic partner, without the consent of the spouse or domestic partner.” This evidence rule, known as the adverse spousal testimonial privilege, allows a defendant to exclude witness testimony by their spouse under most circumstances. A product of common law tradition, this privilege stems from a time when the law treated women as chattel with no independent legal rights. Since Washington State codified the adverse spousal privilege, the United States Supreme Court amended the federal spousal testimonial …

An Essay On Drafting Evidence Legislation And Rules: Challenging The Conventional Wisdom, Edward J. Imwinkelried

Akron Law Review

There have been numerous major efforts to reform and codify American Evidence law. The efforts include the Model Code, the Uniform Rules, the California Evidence Code, and, of course, the Federal Rules of Evidence. The various reform initiatives have attempted to create “an evidence bible for busy trial judges and attorneys.” Of course, to resolve the many common-law splits of authority, the reformers faced substantive evidentiary questions: Should the opponent be permitted to impeach by cross-examining about a bad act that has not resulted in a conviction? Should there be a learned treatise hearsay exception? And should a presumption disappear …

An Archival Exploration Of Lineup Fairness In Eyewitness Research, Phoebe Kane

Student Theses

In this study, we were interested in investigating if the Betaface facial analysis program reliably predicts eyewitness lineup choosing behavior. If face analysis programs are as good or better than human judgements, using them could be a reliably more efficient, reproducible, and equitable basis for choosing fillers and evaluating lineup fairness. We collected 27 datasets from eyewitness researchers and analyzed them to produce Betaface similarity values, which measured the similarity between all the photos in each array. We compared these Betaface data to the identification data from the original studies. Our analysis of the arrays via Betaface yielded data with …

Toward Mutual Recognition: An Investigation Of Oral Tradition Evidence In The United States And Canada, Kalae Trask

Washington Journal of Social & Environmental Justice

United States (“U.S.”) courts have long failed to recognize the value of oral traditional evidence (“OTE”) in the law. Yet, for Indigenous peoples, OTE forms the basis of many of their claims to place, property, and political power. In Canada, courts must examine Indigenous OTE on “equal footing” with other forms of admissible evidence. While legal scholars have suggested applying Canadian precedent to U.S. law regarding OTE, scholarship has generally failed to critically examine the underlying ethos of settler courts as a barrier to OTE admission and usefulness. This essay uses the work of political philosopher, James Tully, …

From Hashtag To Hash Value: Using The Hash Value Model To Report Child Sex Abuse Material, Jessica Mcgarvie

Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental & Innovation Law

In the summer of 2021, Apple announced it would release a Child Safety Feature (CSF) aimed at reducing Child Sex Abuse Materials (CSAM) on its platform. The CSF would scan all images a user uploaded to their iCloud for CSAM, and Apple would report an account with 30 or more flagged images to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Despite Apple’s good intentions, they received intense backlash, with many critics arguing the proposed CSF eroded a user’s privacy. This article explores the technology behind Apple’s CSF and compares it to similar features used by other prominent tech companies. …

Defendants In The Dark: How The Jencks Act Is Incompatible With The Adversarial Legal System, Eli J. Esakoff

Journal of Law and Policy

The Jencks Act is a McCarthy Era law that prohibits compelling the disclosure of any statement made by a government witness in a federal criminal prosecution until after the witness has testified at trial. Passed in 1957 in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Jencks v. United States, the Act’s life in Congress was “nasty, brutish, and short.” In prosecuting its anti-communist “witch hunts” of the era, the government strove to keep hidden as much of its case against those accused as possible. Against this backdrop of the desire for secrecy, the Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant …

The Contribution Of Forensic Science To Wrongful Convictions: An Analysis Of Forensic Expert Testimony, Parker Gunter

Honors Theses

The purpose of this study was to explore the progression and potential improvement of forensic science in court. Errors is forensic science have contributed to the problem of wrongful convictions, but research surrounding forensic expert testimony over the last decade is lacking. The way that an expert explains evidence in court is important to gain a broader understanding for how forensic science may fail. The testimonies of forensic experts were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively to further understand the shortcomings in the field at the end of its journey through the criminal justice system. The results showed that the testimonies …

A New And Improved Doctrine Of Double Effect: Not Just For Trolleys

Connecticut Law Review

In its standard formulation, the doctrine of double effect (DDE) permits an action that causes foreseeable and harmful, even dire, collateral consequences, so long as the actor merely foresees but does not intend them and the harms are proportional to the benefit. Yet DDE’s critics question the moral distinction between intending a bad outcome, on one hand, and merely knowing that the actions will result in the bad outcome but acting in exactly the same way, on the other. After all, except in a few narrow circumstances, criminal law in the United States treats intent and knowledge as equally culpable …

The State Secrets Privilege: An Institutional Process Approach, Alexandra B. Dakich

Northwestern University Law Review

It is no secret that since September 11, 2001, the Executive Branch has acted at variance with laws otherwise restraining its conduct under the guise of national security. Among other doctrines that make up the new national security canon, state secrets privilege assertions have narrowed the scope of redressability for parties alleging official misconduct in national security cases. For parties such as the Muslim American community surveilled by the FBI in Orange County, California, or Abu Zubaydah, who was subjected to confirmed torture tactics by the U.S. government, success in the courts hinges on the government’s unbridled ability to assert …

Some Legal And Practical Challenges In The Investigation Of Cybercrime, Ritz Carr

Cybersecurity Undergraduate Research Showcase

According to the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), in 2021, the United States lost around $6.9 billion to cybercrime. In 2022, that number grew to over $10.2 billion (IC3, 2022). In one of many efforts to combat cybercrimes, at least 40 states “introduced or considered more than 250 bills or resolutions that deal significantly with cybersecurity” with 24 states officially enacting a total of 41 bills (National Conference on State Legislatures, 2022).

The world of cybercrime evolves each day. Nevertheless, challenges arise when we investigate and prosecute cybercrime, which will be examined in the following collection of essays that highlight …

The Securities Law Disclosure Conundrum For Publicly Traded Litigation Finance Companies, Robert F. Weber

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The Article examines a peculiar legal dilemma—implicating securities law, legal ethics, and evidence law—that arises when litigation finance companies (LFCs) become public companies. LFCs provide funding to litigants and law firms for prosecuting lawsuits in exchange for a share of the lawsuit recoveries. In recent years, LFCs have significantly altered the landscape of the civil justice system in common law jurisdictions. But their assets, which are just rights to proceeds from lawsuits, are notoriously opaque— who really can predict what a jury will do when it comes to liability and damages? When LFCs go public, this opacity frustrates public investors’ …

Childist Objections, Youthful Relevance, And Evidence Reconceived, Mae C. Quinn

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Evidence rules are written by and for adults. As a result, they largely lack the vantage point of youth and are rooted in arm’s-length assumptions about the lives and legal interests of young people. Moreover, because children have been mostly treated as evidentiary afterthoughts, they have been patched into the justice system and its procedures in a piecemeal fashion. Yet, to date, there has been no comprehensive scholarly critique of evidence principles and practices for failing to meaningfully account for youth. And the evidentiary intersection of youth and race has been almost entirely overlooked in legal scholarship. This Article, in …

Abortion, The Underground Railroad, And Evidentiary Privilege, Tom Lininger

Washington and Lee Law Review

Building on my recent article in the Minnesota Law Review proposing reforms of evidentiary privilege law, this Article focuses on the unique context of communication about abortion. There is an urgent need to protect such communication in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which allowed states to recriminalize abortion. Now abortion seekers, providers, and third parties who aid and abet abortion could face significant exposure to both criminal penalties and civil suits in many states. Those states are attempting to extend the reach of their bans by sanctioning out-of-state travel and …

“Hey, Google, What Are The Elements Of Homicide By Vehicle In The First Degree?”: The Supreme Court Of Georgia Reinforces The Prohibition On Extrajudicial Information Considered By A Jury In Criminal Trials, Savannah Hall

Mercer Law Review

In a criminal trial, the presentation of evidence and the instruction of law to the jury are of crucial importance to ensure that a person is only convicted based upon sound understandings of the factual and legal framework under which they were charged. The complexities surrounding the rules of evidence are in place so that jurors are only allowed to consider the facts and testimony permissible under the rules of evidence, meaning it is of utmost importance for the jury to consider solely those things which a judge deems admissible, relevant, and helpful to understanding the case. However, given the …

Preventing A (Replication) Crisis In The Courtroom, Kaitlin Mccormick-Huhn

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Long Road To Justice: Why State Courts Should Lower The Evidentiary Burden For Proving Racialized Traffic Stops And Adopt The Exclusionary Rule As A Remedy For Equal Protection Violations, Abby M. Fink

Washington Journal of Social & Environmental Justice

Racist and brutal policing continues to pervade the criminal legal system. Black and brown people who interact with the police consistently face unequal targeting and treatment. Routine traffic stops are especially dangerous and harmful and can lead to death. Under Whren, a police officer’s racist motivations or implicit bias towards a driver do not influence the constitutionality of a traffic stop. An officer only needs to show there was probable cause to believe a traffic stop occurred. Although the unconstitutionality of pre-textual traffic stops has been widely explored since Whren, both federal and state courts have struggled to find legal …

The Owls: Some Difficulties In Judging Scientific Consensus, Harry Collins

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Adversity Of Adversarialism: How The Consensus Rule Reproduces The Expert Paradox, Martin Weinel

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

The "Crisis Of Expertise" Reaches The Courtroom: An Introduction To The Symposium On, And A Response To, Edward Cheng's Consensus Rule, David S. Caudill

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Embracing Deference, Edward K. Cheng, Elodie O. Currier, Payton B. Hampton

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Consensus Rule: Judges, Jurors, And Admissibility Hearings, Robert Evans

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.