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

Law Commons

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

Evidence

Michigan Law Review

Self incrimination

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Acquisition Of Evidence By Search And Seizure, Mary Louise Ramsey Jun 1949

Acquisition Of Evidence By Search And Seizure, Mary Louise Ramsey

Michigan Law Review

What protection do the Fourth and Fifth Amendments afford against acquisition of evidence by search and seizure, actual or constructive? Does an individual have a constitutional privilege against the disclosure of records he is required by law to keep? May police officers search premises on which an arrest is made and seize contraband which they find there? A series of cases recently decided by a closely divided Supreme Court has enveloped this field in the same deep fog of uncertainty which now hangs over so many other areas of constitutional law. The unstable quality of these precedents is attested by …


Evidence - Admissibility Of Defendants Refusal To Submit To A Blood Test For Intoxication, David Davidoff Apr 1942

Evidence - Admissibility Of Defendants Refusal To Submit To A Blood Test For Intoxication, David Davidoff

Michigan Law Review

Defendant was convicted of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated. This appeal was based on the contention that the testimony by a deputy sheriff of defendant's refusal to submit to a blood test to determine whether or not he was intoxicated violated his privilege against self-incrimination and was inadmissible. Held, the evidence was properly admitted. State v. Benson, (Iowa, 1941) 300 N. W. 275.


Criminal Law And Procedure - Evidence - Admissibility Of Lie Detector Tests In Evidence, Michigan Law Review May 1939

Criminal Law And Procedure - Evidence - Admissibility Of Lie Detector Tests In Evidence, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

After all the evidence had been produced for the jury's consideration in a murder trial, defendant's counsel moved to reopen the case and be permitted to take defendant to a laboratory to be examined under a pathometer, or lie detector. Held, that as the court could not take judicial notice that the instrument was or was not effective for determining the truth, because the record gave no indication of general scientific recognition, the motion was denied. People v. Forte, 279 N. Y. 204, 18 N. E. (2d) 31, affg. (King Co. Ct. 1938) 4 N. Y. S. (2d) …