Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Evidence (11)
- Scientific evidence (9)
- Daubert (3)
- Expert testimony (3)
- Expert witness (3)
-
- Rules of evidence (3)
- Admissibility (2)
- Burden of proof (2)
- Consensus rule (2)
- Criminal law (2)
- Expert (2)
- Expert evidence (2)
- Fifth Amendment (2)
- Forensics (2)
- Frye (2)
- Judicial discretion (2)
- Judicial ethics (2)
- Probabilities (2)
- Psychiatric evidence (2)
- Science and law (2)
- Statistics (2)
- Absolute threshold (1)
- Admissibility of evidence (1)
- Admissible evidence (1)
- Adversary system (1)
- Alex Stein (1)
- Averaging (1)
- Best practices (1)
- Bioscience (1)
- Brain scans (1)
Articles 31 - 41 of 41
Full-Text Articles in Law
Can Judges Ignore Inadmissible Information? The Difficulty Of Deliberately Disregarding, Chris Guthrie, Andrew J. Wistrich
Can Judges Ignore Inadmissible Information? The Difficulty Of Deliberately Disregarding, Chris Guthrie, Andrew J. Wistrich
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Due process requires courts to make decisions based on the evidence before them without regard to information outside of the record. Skepticism about the ability of jurors to ignore inadmissible information is widespread. Empirical research confirms that this skepticism is well founded. Many courts and commentators, however, assume that judges can accomplish what jurors cannot. This Article reports the results of experiments we have conducted to determine whether judges can ignore inadmissible information. We found that the judges who participated in our experiments struggled to perform this challenging mental task. The judges had difficulty disregarding demands disclosed during a settlement …
Reenvisioning Law Through The Dna Lens, Edward K. Cheng
Reenvisioning Law Through The Dna Lens, Edward K. Cheng
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In recent times, no development has transformed the practice of criminal justice as much as DNA evidence. In little over fifteen years, DNA profiling has produced nothing short of a paradigm shift.1 For police and prosecutors, DNA has become a potent weapon for identifying and convicting criminals. Trace biological material left at a crime scene now provides critical evidence for generating leads through "cold searches" of DNA databases and for convicting defendants at trial. At the same time, for defense attorneys, DNA has become an invaluable tool for seeking exonerations, because just as DNA can link defendants to crimes, it …
Does Frye Or Daubert Matter? A Study Of Scientific Admissibility Standards, Edward K. Cheng, Albert Yoon
Does Frye Or Daubert Matter? A Study Of Scientific Admissibility Standards, Edward K. Cheng, Albert Yoon
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Nearly every treatment of scientific evidence begins with a faithful comparison between the Frye and Daubert standards. Since 1993, jurists and legal scholars have spiritedly debated which standard is preferable and whether particular states should adopt one standard or the other. These efforts beg the question: Does a state's choice of scientific admissibility standard matter? A growing number of scholars suspect that the answer is no. Under this theory, the import of the Supreme Court's Daubert decision was not in its doctrinal standard, but rather in the general consciousness it raised about the problems of unreliable scientific evidence. This Article …
Mitochondrial Dna: Emerging Legal Issues, Edward K. Cheng
Mitochondrial Dna: Emerging Legal Issues, Edward K. Cheng
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
This article will briefly survey some of the current and emerging legal issues surrounding mtDNA evidence. Parts I and II discuss basic evidentiary questions, including mtDNA's reliability and admissibility under Daubert as well as the potential problem of jury confusion regarding the probative value of mtDNA. Part III considers the broader potential of mtDNA to supplant microscopic hair analysis, a technique often criticized for its subjectivity and high error rate. Finally, Part IV explores the unique privacy concerns raised by the maternal inheritance of mtDNA, specifically in the context of DNA databanks.
Changing Scientific Evidence, Edward K. Cheng
Changing Scientific Evidence, Edward K. Cheng
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
A number of high-profile toxic tort cases, such as silicone breast implants, have followed a familiar and disturbing path: Early studies suggest a link between a suspected substance and a particular illness. Based on these initial studies, lawsuits are brought and juries award large judgments to various plaintiffs. Then later, more comprehensive studies find no evidence of a causal link. How should the legal system cope with this problem in which new scientific evidence calls into question previous findings of liability? These erroneous judgments seriously harm social welfare and legitimacy. Beneficial products are needlessly discontinued or are made more expensive, …
Doubts About Daubert: Psychiatric Anecdata As A Case Study, Christopher Slobogin
Doubts About Daubert: Psychiatric Anecdata As A Case Study, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., the Supreme Court sensibly held that testimony purporting to be scientific is admissible only if it possesses sufficient indicia of scientific validity. In Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, the Court more questionably held that opinion evidence based on "technical" and "specialized" knowledge must meet the same admissibility threshold as scientific testimony. This Article addresses the implications of these two decisions for opinion evidence presented by mental health professionals in criminal trials.
Psychiatric Evidence In Criminal Trials: To Junk Or Not To Junk?, Christopher Slobogin
Psychiatric Evidence In Criminal Trials: To Junk Or Not To Junk?, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
This Article begins, in Part I, with a brief review of the past four decades" of psychiatric and psychological testimony in criminal trials (henceforth referred to simply as "psychiatric testimony"). Although this review cannot be called comprehensive, it does make clear that, contrary to what the popular literature would have us believe, psychiatric innovation is neither at an all time high nor the prevalent form of opinion testimony by mental health professionals. At the same time, such "nontraditional" expert opinion from clinicians, on those rare occasions when it does occur, has changed over the past few decades in both content …
Jaffee V. Redmond: Towards Recognition Of A Federal Counselor-Battered Woman Privilege, Michael Bressman
Jaffee V. Redmond: Towards Recognition Of A Federal Counselor-Battered Woman Privilege, Michael Bressman
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Part I of this Article reviews the Jaffee decision.' Part II discusses the meaning of the Supreme Court's opinion, focusing on the Court's analysis of the important interests at stake in recognizing the asserted testimonial privilege. In Part II, this Article argues that the Court followed the intent of Congress in crafting a psychotherapist- patient privilege. Furthermore, the extension of the privilege to cover confidential communications made to social workers indicates that there is room for further development of the privilege. In Part III, the Article argues that Jaffee provides the foundation for recognition of a counselor-battered woman privilege in …
Testilying: Police Perjury And What To Do About It, Christopher Slobogin
Testilying: Police Perjury And What To Do About It, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Police, like people generally, lie in all sorts of contexts for all sorts of reasons. This article has focused on police lying designed to convict individuals the police think are guilty. Strong measures are needed to reduce the powerful incentives to practice such testilying and the reluctance of prosecutors and judges to do anything about it. Among them might be the adoption of rewards for truth telling, the redefinition of probable cause, and the elimination of the exclusionary rule and its insidious effect on the resolve of legal actors to implement the commands of the Constitution. Ultimately, however, the various …
Estelle V. Smith: The Constitutional Contours Of The Forensic Evaluation, Christopher Slobogin
Estelle V. Smith: The Constitutional Contours Of The Forensic Evaluation, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In Estelle v. Smith,' the United States Supreme Court recognized for the first time that an evaluation of a criminal defendant by a mental health professional may implicate both the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The issues raised in Estelle are significant not only for the legal profession but also for those in the mental health professions who perform "clinical" evaluations for the criminal courts. Estelle involved the case of Ernest Smith, who was sentenced to death by a Texas jury in 1974. Prior to trial, the judge ordered a psychiatrist, Dr. Grigson, …
Capacity To Contest A Search And Seizure: The Passing Of Old Rules And Some Suggestions For New Ones, Christopher Slobogin
Capacity To Contest A Search And Seizure: The Passing Of Old Rules And Some Suggestions For New Ones, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Professor Slobogin examines recent Supreme Court decisions involving standing to challenge search and seizure violations, and argues that the Court's commitment to a "totality of the circumstances" approach has permitted erosion of fourth amendment protections. After concluding that these decisions provide little guidance to lower courts, Professor Slobogin offers a set of principles which will aid in analyzing the Court's direction.