Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (10)
- University of Michigan Law School (8)
- Cornell University Law School (5)
- Selected Works (5)
- Mercer University School of Law (4)
-
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law (3)
- University of Kentucky (3)
- University of Washington School of Law (3)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (3)
- Cleveland State University (2)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (2)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (2)
- UC Law SF (2)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (2)
- University of Baltimore Law (2)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (2)
- Brigham Young University Law School (1)
- Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law (1)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- Penn State Law (1)
- SelectedWorks (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of Missouri School of Law (1)
- University of Richmond (1)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (1)
- Wayne State University (1)
- Keyword
-
- Scientific evidence (16)
- Evidence (11)
- Expert witnesses (8)
- Admissibility (5)
- Hearsay (5)
-
- Witnesses (5)
- Court (3)
- Cross-examination (3)
- Economics (3)
- Empirical legal studies (3)
- Expert (3)
- Expert testimony (3)
- Frye v. United States (3)
- Litigation (3)
- Science (3)
- Testimony (3)
- United States Supreme Court (3)
- Antitrust law (2)
- Character evidence (2)
- Civil trials (2)
- Confessions (2)
- Confrontation Clause (2)
- Custodial interrogations (2)
- Discovery (2)
- Expert evidence (2)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (2)
- Jury reforms (2)
- KRE (2)
- Kentucky Rules of Evidence (2)
- Kentucky Supreme Court (2)
- Publication
-
- Washington and Lee Law Review (10)
- Articles (5)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (5)
- Faculty Publications (4)
- Mercer Law Review (4)
-
- Faculty Scholarship (3)
- Washington Law Review (3)
- All Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Cleveland State Law Review (2)
- Frank R. Herrmann, S.J. (2)
- Indiana Law Journal (2)
- Law Faculty Scholarly Articles (2)
- Michigan Law Review (2)
- Oklahoma Law Review (2)
- The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process (2)
- Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law (1)
- Dr Matilda Arvidsson (1)
- Journal Articles (1)
- Kentucky Law Journal (1)
- Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (1)
- Louise Harmon (1)
- Michigan Journal of International Law (1)
- Scholarly Works (1)
- Susanna K. Ripken (1)
- Thomas D. Lyon (1)
- Touro Law Review (1)
- Trisha Olson (1)
- University of Miami Law Review (1)
- Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 61 - 68 of 68
Full-Text Articles in Law
Are Prosecutorial Ethics Standards Different?, Kevin C. Mcmunigal
Are Prosecutorial Ethics Standards Different?, Kevin C. Mcmunigal
Faculty Publications
Once a prosecutor determines to employ an expert, a number of distinct decisions must be confronted-from choosing the expert, to complying with discovery obligations, to presenting the testimony at trial. Part I of this essay considers the selection of experts. Although improper selection of experts can be viewed as merely another aspect of presenting misleading testimony, we treat it separately in this essay because the literature typically ignores it. Part 1I examines the pretrial disclosure of scientific evidence. The issues that have arisen in this context include late disclosure, omitting information from laboratory reports, declining to have a report prepared, …
Keeping The Reformist Spirit Alive In Evidence Law Tribute, Stephen A. Saltzburg, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Keeping The Reformist Spirit Alive In Evidence Law Tribute, Stephen A. Saltzburg, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Confrontation Clause: Statements Against Penal Interest As A Firmly Rooted Hearsay Exception, Amy N. Loth
The Confrontation Clause: Statements Against Penal Interest As A Firmly Rooted Hearsay Exception, Amy N. Loth
Cleveland State Law Review
This Article will explore why these types of confessions, called self-inculpatory statements, should be admissible under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. Part IIA of this Article will discuss the two-part test set forth in Ohio v. Roberts. Part IIB will address Lilly v. Virginia, the Supreme Court's first attempt to resolve whether statements against penal interest are sufficiently reliable to be admissible under the Confrontation Clause. Part IIB will also explore the distinction between self-inculpatory and non-self-inculpatory statements, what constitutes a "firmnly rooted" hearsay exception, and also the policy concerns behind creating a "firmly rooted" hearsay exception. Part …
Roman And Canonical Roots Of Hearsay Doctrine, Frank Herrmann
Roman And Canonical Roots Of Hearsay Doctrine, Frank Herrmann
Frank R. Herrmann, S.J.
No abstract provided.
A Continental Rule Against Hearsay, Frank Herrmann
A Continental Rule Against Hearsay, Frank Herrmann
Frank R. Herrmann, S.J.
No abstract provided.
The Harvest, Louise Harmon
5. Child Witnesses And The Oath: Empirical Evidence., Thomas D. Lyon
5. Child Witnesses And The Oath: Empirical Evidence., Thomas D. Lyon
Thomas D. Lyon
Malexandertalet: Ett Tal - Två Situationer, Matilda Arvidsson
Malexandertalet: Ett Tal - Två Situationer, Matilda Arvidsson
Dr Matilda Arvidsson
In this article the court speech delivered by the "Malexander widow", Anneli Ljungberg, is analysed in terms of Lloyd Bitzers "rhetorical situation" and found to work within two different and simultaneous rhetorical situations. Thus, the article shows how a court speech might break with rhetorical conventions of one rhetorical situation because of the conventions governing the other and simultaneously ongoing rhetorical situation.