Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Kentucky (4)
- St. Mary's University (3)
- Cornell University Law School (2)
- Pepperdine University (2)
- Selected Works (2)
-
- University of Baltimore Law (2)
- University of Colorado Law School (2)
- University of Michigan Law School (2)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law (1)
- Cleveland State University (1)
- Marquette University Law School (1)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- Mitchell Hamline School of Law (1)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (1)
- University of Richmond (1)
- University of South Carolina (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Kentucky Law Journal (3)
- All Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (2)
- Faculty Articles (2)
- Faculty Scholarship (2)
-
- Pepperdine Law Review (2)
- Publications (2)
- Sherry Colb (2)
- Articles (1)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (1)
- Cleveland State Law Review (1)
- Faculty Publications (1)
- Law Faculty Scholarly Articles (1)
- Marquette Law Review (1)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (1)
- Oklahoma Law Review (1)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (1)
- Susanna K. Ripken (1)
- Touro Law Review (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (1)
- University of Richmond Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 30
Full-Text Articles in Law
One Step Backward: The Ninth Circuit's Unfortunate Rule 404(B) Decision In United States V. Lague, Dora Klein
One Step Backward: The Ninth Circuit's Unfortunate Rule 404(B) Decision In United States V. Lague, Dora Klein
Faculty Articles
The federal courts' current approach to character evidence is widely recognized as problematic. Although Rule 404(b)(1) categorically prohibits the use of character evidence, Rule 404(b)(2) presents a list of examples of permitted purposes that has tempted courts to view the admission of other-acts evidence as proper so long as the evidence is merely relevant to a non-character purpose. Additionally, courts have misconstrued the inclusive structure of Rule 404(b) as creating a presumption
in favor of admissibility. Recent efforts to correct this mistakenly permissive view include decisions by several of the federal circuit courts of appeals recognizing that Rule 404(b) requires …
“Rule Of Inclusion" Confusion, Dora Klein
“Rule Of Inclusion" Confusion, Dora Klein
Faculty Articles
Some rules of evidence are complex. The federal rules governing the admissibility of hearsay statements,' for example, include at least forty different provisions. Numerous judges and scholars have commented on the complexity of the hearsay rules. Not all rules of evidence are complex, however. For example, the federal rules governing the admissibility of character evidence are relatively straightforward: evidence that is offered for the purpose of proving character is inadmissible, subject to a few well-defined exceptions. Despite this relative straightforwardness, many of the federal circuit courts of appeals have overlaid the rules regarding character evidence particularly Rule 404(b)--with unnecessary interpretive …
Incorporating Social Science Into Criminal Defense Practice, Eve Brensike Primus
Incorporating Social Science Into Criminal Defense Practice, Eve Brensike Primus
Articles
In recent decades, social scientists have created a treasure trove of empirical and sociological data that defenders can and should use to help their clients. Evidence rules, criminal law, and criminal procedure are filled with concepts informed by social science. When is evidence likely to unfairly prejudice a defendant in the eyes of a jury? Do police interact differently with members of minority populations and how should that inform concepts of reasonableness? How easy or difficult is it for people to identify individuals they see during high-stress criminal episodes? How effective are police interrogation tactics at getting at the truth …
Restoring The Presumption Of Innocence: Protecting A Defendant’S Right To A Fair Trial By Closing The Door On 404(B) Evidence, Aaron Diaz
St. Mary's Law Journal
Congress enacted the Federal Rules of Evidence to govern evidentiary procedures and “eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay.” In criminal cases, for example, Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) seeks to prevent prosecutors from improperly introducing a defendant’s past misdeeds. Nevertheless, prosecutors often attempt to introduce a defendant’s past misconduct to suggest that a defendant has a propensity to commit crimes, which is improper character evidence. Unsurprisingly, 404(b) is one of the most litigated evidence rules and has generated more published opinions than any other subsections of the Rules. And despite efforts to amend Rule 404(b), the rule has remained virtually untouched. …
Character Flaws, Frederic Bloom
Character Flaws, Frederic Bloom
Publications
Character evidence doctrine is infected by error. It is riddled with a set of pervasive mistakes and misconceptions—a group of gaffes and glitches involving Rule 404(b)’s “other purposes” (like intent, absence of accident, and plan) that might be called “character flaws.” This Essay identifies and investigates those flaws through the lens of a single, sensational case: United States v. Henthorn. By itself, Henthorn is a tale worth telling—an astonishing story of danger and deceit, malice and murder. But Henthorn is more than just a stunning story. It is also an example and an opportunity, a chance to consider character …
Racial Character Evidence In Police Killing Cases, Jasmine Gonzales Rose
Racial Character Evidence In Police Killing Cases, Jasmine Gonzales Rose
Faculty Scholarship
The United States is facing a twofold crisis: police killings of people of color and unaccountability for these killings in the criminal justice system. In many instances, the officers’ use of deadly force is captured on video and often appears clearly unjustified, but grand and petit juries still fail to indict and convict, leaving many baffled. This Article provides an explanation for these failures: juror reliance on “racial character evidence.” Too often, jurors consider race as evidence in criminal trials, particularly in police killing cases where the victim was a person of color. Instead of focusing on admissible evidence, jurors …
Sticks And Stones May Break My Bones, But Words Will Always Hurt Me: Why California Should Expand The Admissibility Of Prior Acts Of Child Abuse, Lindsay Gochnour
Sticks And Stones May Break My Bones, But Words Will Always Hurt Me: Why California Should Expand The Admissibility Of Prior Acts Of Child Abuse, Lindsay Gochnour
Pepperdine Law Review
This Comment seeks to explore the effect that the admissibility of prior bad acts evidence would have on child maltreatment cases and the benefits that would be afforded to child abuse victims if they were provided the same legal protections as victims of other crimes. This Comment argues that expanding the California Evidence Code to allow the admission of prior acts of psychological and emotional child maltreatment would make great progress for the protection of child abuse victims and the prosecution of their (often losing) cases.
Blackness As Character Evidence, Mikah K. Thompson
Blackness As Character Evidence, Mikah K. Thompson
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Federal Rule of Evidence 404 severely limits the government’s ability to offer evidence of a defendant’s character trait of violence to prove action in conformity with that trait on the occasion in question. The Rule states that such character evidence is generally inadmissible when offered to prove propensity. The Rule also allows the government to offer evidence of an alleged victim’s character for peacefulness in homicide cases where the defendant asserts the self-defense privilege. Although criminal defendants may offer character evidence under limited circumstances, Rule 404 creates a significant disincentive for doing so. Where a defendant offers evidence of an …
A Prosecutor's Guide To Character Evidence: When Is Uncharged Possession Evidence Probative Of A Defendant's Intent To Distribute?, James Decleene
A Prosecutor's Guide To Character Evidence: When Is Uncharged Possession Evidence Probative Of A Defendant's Intent To Distribute?, James Decleene
Marquette Law Review
none
"Whodunit" Versus "What Was Done": When To Admit Character Evidence In Criminal Cases, Sherry Colb
"Whodunit" Versus "What Was Done": When To Admit Character Evidence In Criminal Cases, Sherry Colb
Sherry Colb
In virtually every jurisdiction in the United States, the law of evidence prohibits parties from offering proof of an individual's general character traits to suggest that, on a specific occasion, the individual behaved in a manner consistent with those traits. In a criminal trial in particular, the law prohibits a prosecutor's introduction of evidence about the defendant's character as proof of his guilt. In this Article, Professor Colb proposes that the exclusion of defendant character evidence is appropriate in one category of cases but inappropriate in another. In the first category, which Professor Colb calls "whodunit" cases, the parties agree …
Some Thoughts On The Conduct/Status Distinction, Sherry F. Colb
Some Thoughts On The Conduct/Status Distinction, Sherry F. Colb
Sherry Colb
No abstract provided.
Impeachable Offenses?: Why Civil Parties In Quasi-Criminal Cases Should Be Treated Like Criminal Defendants Under The Felony Impeachment Rule, Colin Miller
Pepperdine Law Review
With one exception, every Federal Rule of Evidence dealing with propensity character evidence or evidence which can be misused as propensity character evidence makes it either: (a) as difficult to admit such evidence in civil trials as it is in criminal trials, or (b) more difficult to admit such evidence in civil trials than it is in criminal trials. The "mercy rule" falls into this latter category as it allows criminal defendants to inject the issue of character into their trials while a similar luxury is not afforded to civil parties. Before 2006, however, a substantial minority of courts extended …
Criminal Practice Developments In Maryland Evidence Law And Confrontation Clause Jurisprudence, Lynn Mclain
Criminal Practice Developments In Maryland Evidence Law And Confrontation Clause Jurisprudence, Lynn Mclain
All Faculty Scholarship
This paper was prepared as a handout for a presentation given on July 9th., 2010 to staff at the Harford County Public Defender’s Office, Bel Air, MD. The specific sections of the paper are: Discovery of Witnesses’ Identities: Protective Orders; Jury Selection; Communications from Jurors; Preservation of the Record: Rules 4-323, 5-103, and 5-702; Judicial Notice: Rule 5-201; Balancing Risk of Unfair Prejudice and Confusion against Probative Value: Rule 5-403; Character Evidence; Fifth Amendment Privilege: Miranda; Competency of Witnesses: Rule 5-601; Impeachment by Prior Convictions: Rule 5-609; Questioning by Court: Rule 5-614; Expert Testimony: Rules 5-702 – 5-706; Hearsay; The …
Impeachable Offenses?: Why Civil Parties In Quasi-Criminal Cases Should Be Treated Like Criminal Defendants Under The Felony Impeachment Rule, Colin Miller
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Spreigl Evidence: Still Searching For A Principled Rule, Ted Sampsell-Jones
Spreigl Evidence: Still Searching For A Principled Rule, Ted Sampsell-Jones
Faculty Scholarship
This article first examines how Minnesota’s character evidence doctrine developed, with a particular focus on the historical confusion regarding the propriety of the propensity inference. It then examines current case law and argues that Minnesota’s current Spreigl doctrine routinely allows propensity evidence. It finally proposes a choice between abandoning the current Spreigl doctrine and repealing the character rule itself. The author takes no position on which alternative should be chosen, but either is better than the status quo. The current doctrine in Minnesota is a Potemkin village.
An Evidentiary Paradox: Defending The Character Evidence Prohibition By Upholding A Non-Character Theory Of Logical Relevance, The Doctrine Of Chances, Edward J. Imwinkelried
An Evidentiary Paradox: Defending The Character Evidence Prohibition By Upholding A Non-Character Theory Of Logical Relevance, The Doctrine Of Chances, Edward J. Imwinkelried
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
"Whodunit" Versus "What Was Done": When To Admit Character Evidence In Criminal Cases, Sherry F. Colb
"Whodunit" Versus "What Was Done": When To Admit Character Evidence In Criminal Cases, Sherry F. Colb
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
In virtually every jurisdiction in the United States, the law of evidence prohibits parties from offering proof of an individual's general character traits to suggest that, on a specific occasion, the individual behaved in a manner consistent with those traits. In a criminal trial in particular, the law prohibits a prosecutor's introduction of evidence about the defendant's character as proof of his guilt. In this Article, Professor Colb proposes that the exclusion of defendant character evidence is appropriate in one category of cases but inappropriate in another. In the first category, which Professor Colb calls "whodunit" cases, the parties agree …
Procedural Rules Governing The Admissibility Of Evidence, Reagan Wm. Simpson, Warren S. Huang
Procedural Rules Governing The Admissibility Of Evidence, Reagan Wm. Simpson, Warren S. Huang
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Evidentiary Considerations In Civil Cases, Lynn Mclain
Evidentiary Considerations In Civil Cases, Lynn Mclain
All Faculty Scholarship
Handout from a presentation at the Maryland Judicial Institute outlining character evidence and providing the text of the applicable Rules.
Characteristics Of Soulless Persons: The Applicability Of The Character Evidence Rule To Corporations, Susanna Ripken
Characteristics Of Soulless Persons: The Applicability Of The Character Evidence Rule To Corporations, Susanna Ripken
Susanna K. Ripken
The article discusses the nature of corporate personhood and the propriety of using certain types of evidence to prove corporate misconduct. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404, the character evidence rule, evidence of a person's bad character generally is not admissible to prove that a person acted in conformity with that character on a particular occasion. Although the rule serves to protect individuals in both criminal and civil cases, no consensus exists as to whether the character evidence rule should apply with equal force to corporations. This article argues that the ban on character evidence should not be extended to …
Some Thoughts On The Conduct/Status Distinction, Sherry F. Colb
Some Thoughts On The Conduct/Status Distinction, Sherry F. Colb
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
No Bad Men!: A Feminist Analysis Of Character Evidence In Rape Trials, Aviva A. Orenstein
No Bad Men!: A Feminist Analysis Of Character Evidence In Rape Trials, Aviva A. Orenstein
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
The Character Evidence Defense: Acquittal Based On Good Character, Thomas J. Reed
The Character Evidence Defense: Acquittal Based On Good Character, Thomas J. Reed
Cleveland State Law Review
This article centers on the case of United States v. Martinez, the only recent case in which an accused was acquitted on the ground of good moral character. Martinez illustrates the powerful effect of a good character evidence defense that showed the accused led a blameless life before being inveigled into drug courier service by an intimidating DEA informer. This article begins with a brief review of United States v. Martinez. Following a presentation of this case, the article shifts focus to examine what our sister discipline of psychology can tell us about human personality and the cross-situational stability of …
Introduction: O.J. Simpson And The Criminal Justice System On Trial, Christopher B. Mueller
Introduction: O.J. Simpson And The Criminal Justice System On Trial, Christopher B. Mueller
Publications
No abstract provided.
Character Evidence, James L. Kainen
Kentucky Law Survey: Evidence, Richard H. Underwood
Kentucky Law Survey: Evidence, Richard H. Underwood
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
Kentucky courts faced a number of significant issues in evidence law during the Survey period. Several decisions dealt with character evidence and problems arising from the admission of evidence of prior criminal acts of the accused, either as substantive evidence or for impeachment. This Survey will highlight these cases and to a lesser degree discuss cases on hearsay admissions, opinion, the Kentucky Dead Man Statute and privilege, which also were decided during the Survey period.
Impeachment Of One's Own Witness By Prior Inconsistent Statements Under The Federal And Arkansas Rules Of Evidence, Samuel A. Perroni
Impeachment Of One's Own Witness By Prior Inconsistent Statements Under The Federal And Arkansas Rules Of Evidence, Samuel A. Perroni
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Character Evidence--The Rules Of Admissibility In Criminal Cases In Kentucky, Merle C. Clark
Character Evidence--The Rules Of Admissibility In Criminal Cases In Kentucky, Merle C. Clark
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Evidence: Character Evidence In A Civil Trial, Giles J. Mccarthy
Evidence: Character Evidence In A Civil Trial, Giles J. Mccarthy
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Character Of Deceased And Uncommunicated Threats By Deceased In Homicide Cases, Henry Howe Bramblet
Character Of Deceased And Uncommunicated Threats By Deceased In Homicide Cases, Henry Howe Bramblet
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.