Law Commons^™

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 Dignitary Confrontation Clause, Erin Sheley

Washington Law Review

For seventeen years, the Supreme Court’s Confrontation Clause jurisprudence has been confused and confusing. In Crawford v. Washington (2004), the Court overruled prior precedent and held that “testimonial” out-of-court statements could not be admitted at trial unless the defendant had an opportunity to cross-examine the declarant, even when the statement would be otherwise admissible as particularly reliable under an exception to the rule against hearsay. In a series of contradictory opinions over the next several years, the Court proceeded to expand and then seemingly roll back this holding, leading to widespread chaos in common types of cases, particularly those involving …

Due Process In Prison Disciplinary Hearings: How The “Some Evidence” Standard Of Proof Violates The Constitution, Emily Parker

Washington Law Review

Prison disciplinary hearings have wide-reaching impacts on an incarcerated individual’s liberty. A sanction following a guilty finding is a consequence that stems from hearings and goes beyond mere punishment. Guilty findings for serious infractions, like a positive result on a drug test, can often result in a substantial increase in prison time. Before the government deprives an incarcerated individual of their liberty interest in a shorter sentence, it must provide minimum due process. However, an individual can be found guilty of serious infractions in Washington State prison disciplinary hearings under the “some evidence” standard of proof—a standard that allows for …

Limitations Of Washington Evidence Rule 413, Sarah Desautels

Washington Law Review

This Comment analyzes Washington State Evidence Rule 413 (ER 413). ER 413 renders evidence of the immigration status of criminal defendants, civil plaintiffs, and witnesses presumptively inadmissible at trial. The Washington State Supreme Court adopted ER413 in September 2018. It is the first of its kind in the nation. ER 413 provides a clear, uniform rule limiting the use of immigration evidence, an area where prior caselaw had created uncertainty. However, ER 413 falls short of its goal of promoting access to justice and protecting immigrants from jury bias without a supporting system that addresses (1) the dangers of implicit …

Regulating Bite Mark Evidence: Lesbian Vampires And Other Myths Of Forensic Odontology, Jennifer D. Oliva, Valena E. Beety

Washington Law Review

This is the third piece in a trilogy that examines and evaluates the standards that American courts apply to admit forensic “science” evidence proffered by prosecutors in criminal trials. The first two articles in the trilogy expose the criminal courts’ on-going practice of admitting false forensic evidence that is virtually always excluded in civil cases. They also advance a panoply of procedural and evidentiary solutions aimed at reforming this legally unviable discrepancy. Those solutions are court-centric insofar as they advocate for, among other things, open and early criminal discovery, pre-trial Daubert hearings to challenge evidence and experts, and court-appointment of …

Save Your Breath: A Constitutional Analysis Of The Criminal Penalties For Refusing Breathalyzer Tests In The Wake Of Birchfield V. North Dakota, Kylie Fisher

Washington Law Review Online

Statutes that criminally penalize suspected drunk drivers who refuse to submit to testing of their blood alcohol concentration emerged in a number of states as a way to better enforce implied consent statutes that require drivers submit to such testing. In Birchfield v. North Dakota, the Supreme Court held that statutes that criminally punish individuals for refusing a blood test were unconstitutional but upheld criminal refusal statutes regarding breath tests. Much of the reasoning in the majority’s opinion stemmed from a shallow perception of the invasion that breath tests pose to individual privacy interests. Justice Sotomayor’s dissenting opinion noted …

Preserving Vawa's "Nonreport" Option: A Call For The Proper Storage Of Anonymous/Unreported Rape Kits, Gavin Keene

Washington Law Review

The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) requires participating states and the District of Columbia to pay for medical forensic exams for victims of rape and sexual assault, including the collection of evidence using “rape kits,” whether or not the victim chooses to pursue criminal charges. The chief statutory purpose of the requirement is to preserve evidence in the interest of justice without pressuring a traumatized victim to decide on the spot whether to activate a criminal investigation. Rape kits collected without an accompanying police report are called “anonymous rape kits,” “unreported rape kits,” or “Jane Doe rape kits.” This is …

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari. Kirk V. Invesco, Limited, 138 S.Ct. 1164 (2018) (No. 17-762), 2017 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 4618, 2017 Wl 5665441, Eric Schnapper, Nitin Sud

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED The Fair Labor Standards Act provides that covered employees who work more than 40 hours in a week must generally be paid overtime at a rate one and one-half times their regular rate. To assure compliance with that overtime rule, the Act and governing regulations require employers to maintain records of all hours worked by covered employees. If an employer has failed to keep the legally required records, the burden on the employee under Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co. is simply to "produce[] sufficient evidence to show the amount and extent of that work as a matter …

Electoral Evidence, Peter Nicolas

Articles

Each year, millions of Americans cast votes for specific candidates or on specific ballot measures. Each such vote generates potential "electoral evidence," the admissibility of which may be the subject of dispute in subsequent litigation. The evidence may take various forms, including the marked ballot itself, a voter's testimony regarding her vote, or her written or oral statements regarding her vote.

Electoral evidence is most commonly offered in litigation over the election outcome itself, with the parties seeking to determine how certain individuals voted to resolve a close election. However, its potential relevance is not limited to such proceedings. It …

Missing Police Body Camera Videos: Remedies, Evidentiary Fairness, And Automatic Activation, Mary D. Fan

Articles

A movement toward police regulation by recording is sweeping the nation. Responding to calls for accountability, transparency and better evidence, departments have rapidly adopted body cameras. Recording policies require the police to record more law enforcement encounters than ever before. But what happens if officers do not record? This is an important, growing area of controversy. Based on the collection and coding of police department body camera policies, this Article reveals widespread detection and enforcement gaps regarding failures to record as required. More than half of the major-city departments in the sample have no provisions specifying consequences for not recording …

Hacking Qualified Immunity: Camera Power And Civil Rights Settlements, Mary D. Fan

Articles

Excessive force cases are intensely fact-specific. Did the suspect resist, necessitating the use offorce? What threat did the suspect pose, if any? Was the use of force excessive in light of the situation? These are judgment calls based on myriad facts that differ from case to case. Establishing what really happened forces courts and juries to wade into a fact-bound morass filled with fiercely conflicting defendant-said, police-said battles.

Now an evidentiary transformation is underway. We are in an era where the probability of a police encounter being recorded has never been higher. With the rise of recording—by the public as …

Justice Visualized: Courts And The Body Camera Revolution, Mary D. Fan

Articles

What really happened? For centuries, courts have been magisterially blind, cloistered far away from the contested events that they adjudicate, relying primarily on testimony to get the story—or competing stories. Whether oral or written, this testimony is profoundly human, with all the passions, partisanship and imperfections of human perception.

Now a revolution is coming. Across the nation, police departments are deploying body cameras. Analyzing body camera policies from police departments across the nation, the article reveals an unfolding future where much of the main staple events of criminal procedure law will be recorded. Much of the current focus is on …

Bringing Demonstrative Evidence In From The Cold: The Academy's Role In Developing Model Rules, Maureen A. Howard, Jeffry C. Barnum

Articles

To this day, judges and advocates struggle with the definition and use of "demonstrative evidence." The ambiguity of this term (or its close cousins "illustrative evidence" and evidence offered "for illustrative purposes only") infects the judicial process with uncertainty, hindering advocates when preparing for trial and, in some cases, producing erroneous verdicts. For example, the Seventh Circuit recently reversed a case for improper use of a demonstrative exhibit, and on retrial the result swung from a defense verdict to an $11 million plaintiffs victory. Uncertainty about the admission and use of demonstrative evidence has festered for decades. Lawyers innovate in …

Privacy, Public Disclosure, Police Body Cameras: Policy Splits, Mary D. Fan

Articles

When you call the police for help—or someone calls the police on you—do you bear the risk that your worst moments will be posted on YouTube for public viewing? Police officers enter some of the most intimate incidences of our lives—after an assault, when we are drunk and disorderly, when someone we love dies in an accident, when we are distraught, enraged, fighting, and more. As police officers around the nation begin wearing body cameras in response to calls for greater transparency, communities are wrestling with how to balance privacy with public disclosure.

This Article sheds light on the balances …

Saving An Old Friend From Extinction: A Proposal To Amend Rather Than To Abrogate The Ancient Documents Hearsay Exception, Peter Nicolas

Articles

This Essay critically assesses a pending, proposed amendment to the Federal Rules of Evidence—slated to take effect in December 2017—that would abrogate Federal Rule of Evidence 803(16), the hearsay exception for ancient documents. The proposed amendment was motivated largely by a fear that large quantities of potentially unreliable, stockpiled, electronically stored information (ESI) are approaching the threshold age for being deemed "ancient" and could thus be swept into evidence via the exception.

In Part I of this Essay, I provide an overview of the proposed amendment. In Part II, I contend that although the proposal is a well-intentioned effort to …

The Legal Ethics Of Real Evidence: Of Child Porn On The Choirmaster's Computer And Bloody Knives Under The Stairs, Gregory C. Sisk

Washington Law Review

With little guidance from the Model Rules of Professional Conduct and continuing confusion on professional obligations, questions about engagement with real evidence continue to bedevil criminal defense lawyers, incite prosecutors, generate disputes, and attract judicial attention. Where should we draw that line between what is demanded by the professional duties of zealous advocacy and client confidentiality and what constitutes obstruction of justice? When may a document or object that could conceivably be relevant in some future investigation or proceeding be destroyed, altered, or removed? May a criminal defense lawyer take possession of evidence of a crime for purposes of analysis, …

This Is Your Sword: How Damaging Are Prior Convictions To Plaintiffs In Civil Trials?, Kathryn Stanchi, Deirdre Bowen

Washington Law Review

The conventional wisdom in law is that a prior conviction is one of the most powerful and damaging pieces of evidence that can be offered against a witness or party. In legal lore, prior convictions seriously undercut the credibility of the witness and can derail the outcome of a trial. This Article suggests that may not always be true. This Article details the results of an empirical study of juror decision-making that challenges the conventional wisdom about prior convictions. In our study, the prior conviction evidence did not have a direct impact on the outcome of the civil trial or …

The Psychotherapist Privilege: Privacy And "Garden Variety" Emotional Distress, Helen A. Anderson

Articles

Surprisingly, there is no clear authority on implied waiver of the psychotherapist-patient privilege in federal courts. There is binding authority from the Supreme Court establishing the privilege, but the bold outlines of that decision have been blurred in the confusion about implied waiver.

This Article explores one aspect of that confusion: the popular "garden variety" approach, which favors plaintiffs with what the court deems garden variety, or "normal," mental distress. Although a few other scholars have written on the confusion in the law of implied waiver, this is the first article to look closely at the garden variety approach, which …

Addressing The Costs And Comity Concerns Of International E-Discovery, John T. Yip

Washington Law Review

The volume of electronically stored information (ESI) is expanding rapidly. Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, litigants may request electronic discovery (ediscovery) of many different forms of ESI. In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the party responding to an e-discovery request presumptively pays all e-discovery costs, including the costs of preserving, producing, and reviewing the requested ESI. Therefore, the rapidly increasing volume of ESI has substantially increased the costs of e-discovery for producing parties. In the 2003 case, Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York established a …

Smooth Courtroom Moves: The "Exhibit Dance", Maureen A. Howard

Articles

Current court rules often require parties to identify proposed exhibits in advance of trial, as well as objections to the other side’s evidence, so the judge can make pretrial rulings on admissibility issues (e.g., FRCP 26). This practice saves precious trial time, minimizes the time that jurors are banished during sidebar discussions between judge and counsel, eliminates in large measure surprises about how the evidence will shape up at trial, and arguably promotes settlement. It also allows the exhibits to be pre-marked for identification, further streamlining the trial process.

Nonetheless, trial lawyers still need to be able to lay hands …

Liar! Liar! Impeaching A Witness On Cross-Examination, Maureen A. Howard

Articles

There are certain trial moments that can set an advocate’s heart a-flutter. One is the opportunity to show the jury that an adverse witness is not to be trusted. Even better is the chance to expose the witness to be a bald-faced liar.

Welcome to the wonderful world of impeachment. Impeachment is the art of discrediting the witness on cross-examination. There are seven impeachment techniques:

• Bias, interest, and motive

• Contradictory facts

• Prior convictions — FRE 609

• Prior bad acts — FRE 608 (b)

• Prior inconsistent statements — FRE 613

• Bad character for truthfulness — …

"I'M Dying To Tell You What Happened": The Admissibility Of Testimonial Dying Declarations Post-Crawford, Peter Nicolas

Articles

This Article demonstrates the existence and delineates the scope of a federal constitutional definition of "dying declarations" that is distinct from the definitions set forth in the Federal Rules of Evidence and their state counterparts. This Article further demonstrates that states have state constitutional definitions of "dying declarations" (for purposes of interpreting state constitutional analogues to the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment) that may differ in important respects from the federal constitutional definition of "dying declarations."

This Article then shows that some of the definitions of "dying declarations" contained in federal and state hearsay exceptions exceed the federal and …

Balancing Interests Under Washington's Statute Governing The Admissibility Of Extraneous Sex-Offense Evidence, Blythe Chandler

Washington Law Review

American courts traditionally exclude evidence that a defendant has committed crimes other than the crime with which the defendant is charged. This rule, with exceptions, is codified as Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and Washington Evidence Rule 404(b). However, courts and legislatures have increasingly adopted the view that evidence of other sex offenses should be admissible in sex-offense prosecutions. The Washington State Legislature recently adopted a statute, RCW 10.58.090, which governs the admissibility of evidence of other sex offenses. This Comment argues that Washington courts should use precedent applying Rule 404(b) as a guide in applying robust Rule 403 balancing …

Left Hand, Third Finger: The Wearing Of Wedding (Or Other) Rings As A Form Of Assertive Conduct Under The Hearsay Rule, Peter Nicolas

Articles

No abstract provided.

Swiss Cheese That's All Hole: How Using Reading Material To Prove Criminal Intent Threatens The Propensity Rule, Jessica Murphy

Washington Law Review

In United States v. Curtin, the Ninth Circuit, sitting en banc, held that Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) permits a defendant’s reading material to be introduced as evidence of his intent to commit a crime. The decision expressly overruled Guam v. Shymanovitz, an earlier Ninth Circuit opinion that called the admissibility of reading material into question. This Note argues that the Curtin decision failed to appreciate the extent to which reading material may reveal only a defendant’s propensity to commit a charged crime, rather than his or her intent to do so. To reduce the possibility that impermissible …