Law Commons^™

Summary Of State V. Kincade, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 102, Shaina Plaksin

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined whether the district court properly excluded evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant that did not comply with NRS 179.045(5) because it failed to include either a statement of probable cause or the affidavit upon which probable cause was based.

"Santa Baby, Just Slip A Sable Under The Tree For Me:" Or At Least A Catchall Exception To The Hearsay Rule?, Cynthia Ford

Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings

This article examines Montana's two rule-based "catchall" or "residual" hearsay exceptions, and a statutory exception that applies only to child declarants in criminal cases.

Promising Protection: 911 Call Records As Foundation For Family Violence Intervention, James G. Dwyer

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Sky Is The Limit: Regulating The Next Generation Of Privacy Invasion, Laura Patty

GGU Law Review Blog

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Perez V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 90, Collin Jayne

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined the admissibility of expert testimony on “grooming behavior” by accused sexual offenders and the effect that this behavior has on child victims.

The Utilization Of Chiral Ion Mobility Spectrometry For The Detection Of Enantiomeric Mixtures And Thermally Labile Compounds, Howard K. Holness

FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations

This dissertation utilized electrospray ion mobility mass spectrometry (ESI-IMS-MS) to develop methods necessary for the separation of chiral compounds of forensic interest. The compounds separated included ephedrines and pseudoephedrines, that occur as impurities in confiscated amphetamine type substances (ATS) in an effort to determine the origin of these substances. The ESI-IMS-MS technique proved to be faster and more cost effective than traditional chromatographic methods currently used to conduct chiral separations such as gas and liquid chromatography. Both mass spectrometric and computational analysis revealed the separation mechanism of these chiral interactions allowing for further development to separate other chiral compounds by …

"As I Lay Dying:" A Halloween Meditation On The Use Of Dying Declarations In Montana, Cynthia Ford

Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings

This article discusses the Montana hearsay exception for "dying declarations."

Ehearsay, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amici Curiae In Support Of Appellant, James Townsend V. Midland Funding, Llc, Stuart Robert Cohen, Peter A. Holland

Court Briefs

The Consumer Protection Clinic of the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, filed a Motion to Participate and an Amicus Brief in the case of Townsend v. Midland Funding, LLC. The case presents the question of whether documents created by third party predecessors in interest—usually a bank—may be admitted into evidence when a debt buyer plaintiff does not demonstrate personal knowledge regarding any of the foundational elements which would be required to admit the documents under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. Amici urge the Court to overturn the lower court, and hold that a …

The Future Of The Similar Fact Rule In An Indian Evidence Act Jurisdiction: Singapore, Siyuan Chen

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

In yet another attempt to bridge the gap between the rules of an antiquated statute and the modern realities of practice, Singapore’s Evidence Act was amended in 2012. Certain relevancy provisions were amended to allow greater admissibility of evidence. While new provisions were introduced to act as a check against abuse, oddly some similar fact provisions were left intact. This paper explains why the 2012 amendments have rendered the future of these enactments very uncertain. This paper also suggests a number of tentative recommendations as regards future legislative change or judicial interpretation. To the extent that Singapore’s Evidence Act was …

Summary Of Holmes V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 59, Brian Vasek

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined whether the fairness of a criminal trial was compromised by the district court’s admission into evidence of: (1) rap lyrics that the accused wrote while in jail; (2) a co-conspirator’s out-of-court statement that the accused “went off” and “just started shooting”; and (3) unwarned statements that the accused made to Nevada detectives who interviewed him out of state.

Altering Attention In Adjudication, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Andrew J. Wistrich, Chris Guthrie

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Judges decide complex cases in rapid succession but are limited by cognitive constraints. Consequently judges cannot allocate equal attention to every aspect of a case. Case outcomes might thus depend on which aspects of a case are particularly salient to the judge. Put simply, a judge focusing on one aspect of a case might reach a different outcome than a judge focusing on another. In this Article, we report the results of a series of studies exploring various ways in which directing judicial attention can shape judicial outcomes. In the first study, we show that judges impose shorter sentences when …

Summary Of Rugamas V. Eighth Judicial District Court, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 46, Brittany K. Puzey

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenging a district court order denying a pretrial petition for a writ of habeas corpus based on alleged deficiencies in the grand jury proceedings.

Ringers Revisited, Richard H. Underwood

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In this short essay, Professor Underwood addresses an important development in the law dealing with eyewitness testimony and the New Jersey case of State v. Henderson. He gets at the subject by looking back to a 1950s television play starring fellow Kentucky resident, William Shatner. However, in this particular instance, William Shatner would not change the world.

Challenging Judicial Notice Of Facts On The Internet Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 201, Coleen M. Barger

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Duties Of Non-Judicial Actors In Ensuring Competent Negotiation, Stephanos Bibas

All Faculty Scholarship

This essay, written for a symposium at Duquesne Law School entitled Plea Bargaining After Lafler and Frye, offers thoughts on how lawyers could learn from doctors’ experience in catching and preventing medical errors and aviation experts’ learning from airplane crashes and near misses. It also expresses skepticism about the efficacy of judges’ ex post review of ineffective assistance of counsel, but holds out more hope that public-defender organizations, bar associations, probation officers, sentencing judges, sentencing commissions, and line and supervisory prosecutors can do much more to prevent misunderstanding and remedy ineffective bargaining advice in the first place.

Text Messages And The Hearsay Rule In The Aaron Hernandez Case, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Limited Admissibility And Its Limitations, Lisa Dufraimont

Articles & Book Chapters

Among the challenges facing juries and judges in adjudicating cases is the obligation to use evidence for limited purposes. Evidence inadmissible for one purpose is frequently admissible for other purposes, a situation known as "limited admissibility". Where limited admissibility arises in jury trials, courts generally deliver limiting instructions outlining the inferences that can legitimately be drawn from the evidence and identifying prohibited lines of reasoning to be avoided. Limiting instructions represent an expedient solution to limited-admissibility problems, but they create obvious problems of their own. A thoughtful observer might suspect-as psychological studies confirm-that limiting instructions are likely to fail in …

Summary Of Newman V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 24, Sara Stephan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a jury conviction in the Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County, of battery by strangulation and willfully endangering a child as a result of child abuse. The Nevada Supreme Court addressed two issues both rooted in NRS 48.045’s prohibition against using character or prior-bad-act evidence to prove criminal propensity. The defendant did not mount a conventional accidental injury defense to the child abuse charge and admitted to possessing an aggressive character, eliminating the relevance for evidence showing this to be true.

Law And Local Activism: Uncovering The Civil Rights History Of Chambers V. Mississippi, Emily Prifogle

Articles

Countless academics have examined and discussed the importance of Chambers v. Mississippi in a multitude of areas including compulsory due process, admission of hearsay, third party guilt evidence, false confessions, racial evaluations of hearsay and witnesses, and morally reasonable verdicts. In contrast, this article attempts to excavate the account of a rural Mississippi community’s struggle for rights that underlies the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Chambers. On its face, the case has no link or reference to the civil rights movement. However, this paper reveals that local civil rights activists took armed, direct economic action for equal rights Woodville, Mississippi, …

The 2012 Amendments To Singapore's Evidence Act: More Questions Than Answers As Regards Expert Opionion Evidence?, Siyuan Chen

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Singapore amended the expert opinion evidence provisions in its Evidence Act (EA) in 2012. The criteria for admissibility have been broadened, but the courts are now also expressly given the discretion to exclude relevant expert opinion evidence if it is ‘in the interests of justice’. This article explains why the 2012 amendments have raised more questions than answered them. First, Parliament did not appear to have properly appreciated the distinction—as conceptualised by the EA—between legal and logical relevance and relevance and admissibility. Second, it did not appear to have appreciated the distinction between general and specific relevance. Third, the introduction …

Comments On Maryland V. King In 'U.S. Supreme Court To Hear Arguments Over Md. Dna Case: Justices' Decision Will Have National Implications On Future Crime-Fighting Procedures', Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Bulk Misdemeanor Justice, Stephanos Bibas

All Faculty Scholarship

This short essay responds to Alexandra Natapoff’s article Misdemeanors, which shines a much-needed spotlight on the mass production of criminal justice and injustice in millions of low-level cases. The prime culprit in Natapoff’s story is the hidden, informal discretion that police officers enjoy to arrest, charge, and effect convictions, abetted by prosecutors’ and judges’ abdication and defense counsel’s absence or impotence. The roots of the problem she identifies, I argue, go all the way down to the system’s professionalization and mechanization. Given the magnitude of the problem, Natapoff’s solutions are surprisingly half-hearted, masking the deeper structural problems that demand …

Death Of Paradox: The Killer Logic Beneath The Standards Of Proof, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The prevailing but contested view of proof standards is that factfinders should determine facts by probabilistic reasoning. Given imperfect evidence, they should ask themselves what they think the chances are that the burdened party would be right if the truth were to become known; they then compare those chances to the applicable standard of proof.

I contend that for understanding the standards of proof, the modern versions of logic — in particular, fuzzy logic and belief functions — work better than classical probability. This modern logic suggests that factfinders view evidence of an imprecisely perceived and described reality to form …

Evidence, Probability, And The Burden Of Proof, Alex Stein, Ronald J. Allen

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Real Women, Real Rape, Bennett Capers

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Pre-Disclosure Accumulations By Activist Investors: Evidence And Policy, Lucian A. Bebchuk, Alon Brav, Robert J. Jackson Jr., Wei Jiang

Ira M. Millstein Center for Global Markets and Corporate Ownership

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is currently considering a rulemaking petition requesting that the Commission shorten the ten-day window, established by Section 13(d) of the Williams Act, within which investors must publicly disclose purchases of a five percent or greater stake in public companies. In this Article, we provide the first systematic empirical evidence on these disclosures and find that several of the petition's factual premises are not consistent with the evidence.

Our analysis is based on about 2,000 filings by activist hedge funds during the period of 1994-2007. We find that the data are inconsistent with the petition's …

Modernizing Jury Instructions In The Age Of Social Media, David Aaronson, Sydney Patterson

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.

Prior Statements In Montana: Part Ii, Cynthia Ford

Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings

This article is part two of a two-part series on prior statements in Montana. This article examines prior consistent statements under M.R.E.. 801(d)(1)(B) and how the language of the rule is unclear and confusing, especially compared to the federal version. As a result, Montana has a myriad of case law attempting to apply the Montana rule on prior consistent statements. The article first provides background to the establishment of the rule about prior consistent statements. Next the article discusses both federal and Montana "trigger" cases and compares Montana's approach with that of the federal courts. The article then offers suggestions …

Tender Is The Night: Should Your Expert Be?, Cynthia Ford

Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings

This article discusses the practice of tendering an expert for acceptance or certification by the court at trial in the presence of the jury. The article considers Tennessee and Montana state and federal evidence law. The author suggests that Montana courts and lawyers should comply with the A.B.A. Updated Civil Trial Standard 14 and let juries assess the testimony of a Rule 702 witness without a special designation accorded by the judge certifying a witness as an "expert" in his or her field.