Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Miami Law School (8)
- UIC School of Law (4)
- University of Michigan Law School (3)
- University of Richmond (3)
- Loyola University Chicago, School of Law (2)
-
- Seattle University School of Law (2)
- University of Washington School of Law (2)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (2)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (2)
- Florida State University College of Law (1)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- Penn State Law (1)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (1)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- West Virginia University (1)
- Keyword
-
- Expert evidence (3)
- Hearsay (3)
- Testimony (3)
- Admissible evidence (2)
- Discovery (2)
-
- Evidence (2)
- Exception (2)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (2)
- Polemics (2)
- Administrative Searches for Evidence of Crime: The Impact of New York v. Burger (1)
- Admissibility (1)
- Admissibility of evidence (1)
- Annual Survey of Virginia Law (1)
- Avocet Development Corp. v. McLean Bank (1)
- Branzburg v. Hayes (1)
- Brown v. Commonwealth (1)
- Brown v. Peters (1)
- Burden of proof (1)
- Camara (1)
- Child (1)
- Child abuse (1)
- Child sexual abuse (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Clark v. Commonwealth (1)
- Colonnade Catering Corp. v. United States (1)
- Commercial property (1)
- Common law of evidence (1)
- Confrontation (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Corroboration (1)
- Publication
-
- University of Miami Law Review (8)
- UIC Law Review (4)
- University of Richmond Law Review (3)
- Loyola University Chicago Law Journal (2)
- Michigan Law Review (2)
-
- Seattle University Law Review (2)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (2)
- Washington Law Review (2)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (2)
- Florida State University Law Review (1)
- Fordham Urban Law Journal (1)
- In the Public Interest (1)
- Penn State International Law Review (1)
- Touro Law Review (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (1)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (1)
- West Virginia Law Review (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 35
Full-Text Articles in Law
Expert Testimony On Rape Trauma Syndrome: An Argument For Limited Admissibility—State V. Black, 109 Wash. 2d 336, 745 P.2d 12 (1987), Deborah A. Dwyer
Expert Testimony On Rape Trauma Syndrome: An Argument For Limited Admissibility—State V. Black, 109 Wash. 2d 336, 745 P.2d 12 (1987), Deborah A. Dwyer
Washington Law Review
In State v. Black, the Washington Supreme Court faced the question of whether the State, in a rape case, should be allowed to offer expert testimony on rape trauma syndrome ("RTS"). After examining some of the relevant scientific literature, case law, and the standards governing the admissibility of expert testimony, the court held that expert testimony on RTS was inadmissible. The court based its decision on findings that RTS testimony lacks scientific reliability, and that it unfairly prejudices a defendant accused of rape. The court's holding in Black was based on a misinterpretation of the available scientific literature, and on …
Expert Testimony On Rape Trauma Syndrome: An Argument For Limited Admissibility—State V. Black, 109 Wash. 2d 336, 745 P.2d 12 (1987), Deborah A. Dwyer
Expert Testimony On Rape Trauma Syndrome: An Argument For Limited Admissibility—State V. Black, 109 Wash. 2d 336, 745 P.2d 12 (1987), Deborah A. Dwyer
Washington Law Review
In State v. Black, the Washington Supreme Court faced the question of whether the State, in a rape case, should be allowed to offer expert testimony on rape trauma syndrome ("RTS"). After examining some of the relevant scientific literature, case law, and the standards governing the admissibility of expert testimony, the court held that expert testimony on RTS was inadmissible. The court based its decision on findings that RTS testimony lacks scientific reliability, and that it unfairly prejudices a defendant accused of rape. The court's holding in Black was based on a misinterpretation of the available scientific literature, and on …
Twist And Shout And Truth Will Out: An Argument For The Adoption Of A "Safety-Valve" Exception To The Washington Hearsay Rule, George R. Nock
Twist And Shout And Truth Will Out: An Argument For The Adoption Of A "Safety-Valve" Exception To The Washington Hearsay Rule, George R. Nock
Seattle University Law Review
This Article will focus on two decisions of the Washington Supreme Court illustrating the unfortunate expansion of certain hearsay exceptions in order to accommodate truth, show that the expansion could have been avoided had Washington adopted a "general" exception comparable to that found in the Federal Rules of Evidence, and propose the adoption of an exception shorn of the defects of the rejected federal version.
Balancing The Right To Confrontation And The Need To Protect Child Sexual Abuse Victims: Are Statutes Authorizing Televised Testimony Serving Their Purpose?, Kimberley Seals Bressler
Balancing The Right To Confrontation And The Need To Protect Child Sexual Abuse Victims: Are Statutes Authorizing Televised Testimony Serving Their Purpose?, Kimberley Seals Bressler
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment begins by providing a brief outline of the procedures regulating the use of televised testimony. Next, against the larger backdrop of the history of the right to confrontation, Part III addresses the treatment of televised testimony as hearsay. This section presents a recent Maryland decision as an illustration of the undesirable analogy of televised testimony to hearsay that leads to a more difficult admission standard. Part III concludes with the argument that televised testimony is the functional equivalent of in-court testimony, and thus, a hearsay analysis is inappropriate. Part IV of this Comment presents a recent Supreme Court …
The Meaning Of Probative Value And Prejudice In Federal Rule Of Evidence 403: Can Rule 403 Be Used To Resurrect The Common Law Of Evidence?, Edward J. Imwinkelried
The Meaning Of Probative Value And Prejudice In Federal Rule Of Evidence 403: Can Rule 403 Be Used To Resurrect The Common Law Of Evidence?, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Vanderbilt Law Review
In the common law system of evidence, logically relevant evidence is presumptively admissible. The logical relevance of an item of evidence, however, does not guarantee its admission. The common law has developed a number of rules that exclude logically relevant evidence. In some cases, the common law excludes evidence because of doubts about the credibility or reliability of that type of evidence. For example, the best evidence rule rests primarily on skepticism about the trustworthiness of secondary evidence concerning a document's contents.- When the issue is the content of a document, the common law prefers that the document itself be …
Reverse Silver Platter: Should Evidence That State Officials Obtained In Violation Of A State Constitution Be Admissible In A Federal Criminal Trial?
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Evidence—The Confrontation Clause—A Literal Right To A Face-To-Face Meeting. Coy V. Iowa, 108 S. Ct. 2798 (1988)., Tammera L. Rankin
Evidence—The Confrontation Clause—A Literal Right To A Face-To-Face Meeting. Coy V. Iowa, 108 S. Ct. 2798 (1988)., Tammera L. Rankin
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Admissibility Of Former Testimony Under Rule 804(B)(1): Defining A Predecessor In Interest, Mark Lawrence
The Admissibility Of Former Testimony Under Rule 804(B)(1): Defining A Predecessor In Interest, Mark Lawrence
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Cross-Examination Of Expert Witnesses: Dispelling The Aura Of Reliability, Lee Waldman Miller
Cross-Examination Of Expert Witnesses: Dispelling The Aura Of Reliability, Lee Waldman Miller
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Rule 26(B)(4) Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure: Discovery Of Expert Information, James L. Hayes, Paul T. Ryder Jr.
Rule 26(B)(4) Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure: Discovery Of Expert Information, James L. Hayes, Paul T. Ryder Jr.
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Mandatory And Permissive Presumptions In Criminal Cases: The Morass Created By Allen, Shari L. Jacobson
Mandatory And Permissive Presumptions In Criminal Cases: The Morass Created By Allen, Shari L. Jacobson
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Admissibility Of Expert Witness Testimony: Time To Take The Final Leap?, Maury R. Olicker
The Admissibility Of Expert Witness Testimony: Time To Take The Final Leap?, Maury R. Olicker
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Impeachment Exception To Rule 407: Limitations On The Introduction Of Evidence Of Subsequent Measures, Robert K. Harris
The Impeachment Exception To Rule 407: Limitations On The Introduction Of Evidence Of Subsequent Measures, Robert K. Harris
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Uncharged Misconduct Under Rule 404(B): The Admissibility Of Inextricably Intertwined Evidence, Jennifer Y. Schuster
Uncharged Misconduct Under Rule 404(B): The Admissibility Of Inextricably Intertwined Evidence, Jennifer Y. Schuster
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Admissibility Of Expert Psychological Testimony In Cases Involving The Sexual Misuse Of A Child, Dirk Lorentzen
The Admissibility Of Expert Psychological Testimony In Cases Involving The Sexual Misuse Of A Child, Dirk Lorentzen
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Hot Air In The Redwoods, A Sequel To The Wind In The Willows, William Twining
Hot Air In The Redwoods, A Sequel To The Wind In The Willows, William Twining
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Hot Air in the Redwoods by Kenneth Graham, Jr.
The Admissibility Of Expert Testimony On Interracial Conflict In New York State Self-Defense Cases, Jay Lippman
The Admissibility Of Expert Testimony On Interracial Conflict In New York State Self-Defense Cases, Jay Lippman
In the Public Interest
No abstract provided.
Rock V. Arkansas, Stevan D. Mitchell
Rock V. Arkansas, Stevan D. Mitchell
Florida State University Law Review
Evidence/Constitutional Law-THE ADMISSIBILITY OF POSTHYPNOTIC TESTIMONY: CONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS AND THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO TESTIFY
Growing Disenchantment With Hypnotic Means Of Refreshing Witness Recall, Michael J. Beaudine
Growing Disenchantment With Hypnotic Means Of Refreshing Witness Recall, Michael J. Beaudine
Vanderbilt Law Review
Society has developed several uses for the psychological phenomenon known as hypnosis.' These uses, mostly medical in nature, include substituting for anesthesia and treating pain, anxiety, phobias, and allergies. Not surprisingly, some professional athletes have turned to hypnosis for better success on the playing field. While the scientific and medical communities generally have accepted these uses, controversy has arisen over the use of hypnosis in legal proceedings to refresh the memory of a witness who testifies later in court. The use of hypnosis for investigating crimes began in the early 1970s when law enforcement agencies and police departments formed the …
Prejudice, Politics, And Proof, Peter Tillers
Prejudice, Politics, And Proof, Peter Tillers
Michigan Law Review
In the last fifteen years there has been a great resurgence of interest in fundamental theoretical analysis of the nature of factual proof in litigation. Many serious scholars, both in the law school world and outside it, have turned their energies in this direction. William L. Twining, Quain Professor of Jurisprudence at University College London, has been a major figure in this growing movement. He recently published a painstaking and scholarly study of Bentham's and Wigmore's theories of evidence, inference, and proof in adjudication. This book is part of Twining's broader, long-term effort to develop a general theoretical framework for …
Evidence, Leonard L. Cavise Prof., Bradley J. Martin
Evidence, Leonard L. Cavise Prof., Bradley J. Martin
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Rape Shield Laws--Is It Time For Reinforcement?, Catherine L. Kello
Rape Shield Laws--Is It Time For Reinforcement?, Catherine L. Kello
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Note takes a critical look at civil suits arising from allegations of rape, particularly from the perspective of how these actions run counter to the spirit of rape reform and rape shield legislation. The analysis begins with a brief history of the Rape Shield Law and its intended purposes. Part II then utilizes two cases to outline the current dilemma posed by civil suits that are filed during a pending criminal sexual conduct prosecution. After presenting these cases, Part III considers whether a legislative remedy is required and determines that it is. Part IV then proposes a Model Statute. …
The Unsolved Problem In Taking Evidence Abroad: The Non-Rule Of Aerospatiale, William L. Wilks, Nancy E. Goldberg
The Unsolved Problem In Taking Evidence Abroad: The Non-Rule Of Aerospatiale, William L. Wilks, Nancy E. Goldberg
Penn State International Law Review
In the Aerospatiale decision, the United States Supreme Court attempts to define the powers of American courts to compel discovery from foreign litigants in those courts, in light of the Hague Evidence Convention. This article initially examines the various interpretations of the Convention used to solve the "apples/oranges" problem, encountered by litigants from different nations and incompatible jurisprudential systems, when they seek to obtain evidence located outside the U.S. or in the control of a foreign litigant. The Court's response to this problem is later addressed by an analysis of its decision, which seems to confuse the situation further, for …
Discovery In Complex Litigation: The Dilemma Faced By The Judiciary, Brian Havey
Discovery In Complex Litigation: The Dilemma Faced By The Judiciary, Brian Havey
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
No abstract provided.
University Of Richmond Law Review
University Of Richmond Law Review
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Rock V. Arkansas: Hypnosis And The Prejudice Rule - Your Memories May Not Be Your Own, 21 J. Marshall L. Rev. 409 (1988), Gail Downer Zwemke
Rock V. Arkansas: Hypnosis And The Prejudice Rule - Your Memories May Not Be Your Own, 21 J. Marshall L. Rev. 409 (1988), Gail Downer Zwemke
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
The New Illinois Videotape Statute In Child Sexual Abuse Cases: Reconciling The Defendant's Constitutional Rights With The State's Interest In Prosecuting Defenders, 22 J. Marshall L. Rev. 331 (1988), Denise C. Hockley-Cann
The New Illinois Videotape Statute In Child Sexual Abuse Cases: Reconciling The Defendant's Constitutional Rights With The State's Interest In Prosecuting Defenders, 22 J. Marshall L. Rev. 331 (1988), Denise C. Hockley-Cann
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Newsman's Confidential Source Privilege In Virginia, Phillip Randolph Roach Jr.
The Newsman's Confidential Source Privilege In Virginia, Phillip Randolph Roach Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
The two hundredth anniversary celebration of the United States Constitution in 1987 provided an excellent opportunity to reflect upon how we now interpret the political doctrines that influenced the founding fathers in forming our government. At the time of the American Revolution, the basic tenets and freedoms that were written into the Declaration of Independence, and later incorporated into the Bill of Rights through the efforts of James Madison and George Mason of Virginia were considered essential human rights.
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Evidence, Charles E. Friend
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Evidence, Charles E. Friend
University of Richmond Law Review
In terms of evidence legislation, the most significant development of the past year may be what did not happen in Virginia. In late 1987 the Supreme Court of Virginia, following a long period of careful study, recommended against the adoption of a statutory code of evidence for Virginia. In announcing the court's conclusion, Chief Justice Carrico cited a passage from the 1987 Annual Survey of VirginiaLaw, which stated: "When it comes to the formulation of rules of evidence, the common-law system of judge-made rules, supplemented by a steady flow of case opinions from competent appellate courts, is far superior to …
The Applicability Of Evidentiary Privileges For Confidential Communications Before Congress, 21 J. Marshall L. Rev. 309 (1988), Thomas Millet
The Applicability Of Evidentiary Privileges For Confidential Communications Before Congress, 21 J. Marshall L. Rev. 309 (1988), Thomas Millet
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.