Law Commons^™

Why Illinois Should Adopt Federal Rule Of Evidence 803(18) To Allow The Learned Treatise Exception To The Hearsay Rule, 39 S. Ill. U. L.J. 275 (2015), Ralph Ruebner, Katarina Durcova, Amy Taylor

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

Illinois still adheres to a rigid and outdated common law principle that treats a learned treatise as hearsay. This principle stands at odds with the adoption of Federal Rules of Evidence 703 ("FRE 703")' and 705 ("FRE 705") by the Illinois Supreme Court. Illinois courts have developed clever ways to get around the common law prohibition thereby creating an incoherent and inconsistent jurisprudence that at times yields bizarre outcomes.

Adopting the federal learned treatise exception to the hearsay rule would set out a consistent standard in Illinois for admitting learned treatises and allowing them as substantive evidence. Now that Illinois …

Amending Rape Shield Laws: Outdated Statutes Fail To Protect Victims On Social Media, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1087 (2015), Sydney Janzen

UIC Law Review

This Comment will first discuss the discoverability and admissibility of social media evidence in criminal and/or civil sexual assault cases. Section II(A) provides a broad overview of both federal and state rape shield laws, including the legislative policies behind their enactments, as well as the modern expansion of social media in the context of the legal system. Section II(B) will address the modern utility of social media in the context of the legal system. Section III first analyzes how courts look at discoverability and admissibility of social media evidence generally, and then focuses on sexual assault cases specifically. Further, Section …

Taking A Bite Out Of Forensic Science: The Misuse Of Accelerant-Detecting Dogs In Arson Cases, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1149 (2015), Andrew Scott

UIC Law Review

This Comment identifies the proper uses of canine handler teams in arson investigations and trials. Part II discusses the origins of forensic science in criminal trials, the use of expert witnesses in the courtroom, the history and role of forensic science and canine handler teams in arson cases, and the problem of “junk science.” Part III analyzes the pros and cons of using canine handler teams in arson investigations and the dilemma courts face when confronted with unconfirmed canine alerts. Part IV resolves the issue of using canine handler teams in arson investigations. First, it advocates for their continued use …