Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (9)
- Pepperdine University (4)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (4)
- University of Richmond (4)
- Selected Works (3)
-
- Duke Law (2)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas (2)
- American University Washington College of Law (1)
- BLR (1)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- Georgetown University Law Center (1)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- Pace University (1)
- Seattle University School of Law (1)
- SelectedWorks (1)
- St. John's University School of Law (1)
- University of Kentucky (1)
- University of Maine School of Law (1)
- University of South Carolina (1)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (1)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (8)
- Faculty Scholarship (5)
- Pepperdine Law Review (4)
- Touro Law Review (4)
- University of Richmond Law Review (3)
-
- Andrea L Roth (1)
- Articles (1)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (1)
- Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo (1)
- Erwin Chemerinsky (1)
- ExpressO (1)
- Faculty Publications (1)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (1)
- Graduate Research Symposium (GCUA) (2010 - 2017) (1)
- Indiana Law Journal (1)
- James L. Kainen (1)
- Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Law Faculty Scholarly Articles (1)
- Maine Law Review (1)
- Pace Law Review (1)
- Seattle University Law Review (1)
- South Carolina Law Review (1)
- UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones (1)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (1)
- Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 44
Full-Text Articles in Law
Army Commander’S Role—The Judge, Jury, & Prosecutor For The Article 15, Anthony Godwin
Army Commander’S Role—The Judge, Jury, & Prosecutor For The Article 15, Anthony Godwin
Seattle University Law Review
Service members in the armed forces are bound by a different set of rules when compared to other U.S. citizens. Some of the normal safeguards and protections that civilians enjoy are much more restrictive for military service members, and this is generally for a good reason. Such restrictions are partly due to the complex demands and needs of the United States military. Congress and the President have entrusted military commanders with special powers that enable them to handle minor violations of law without needing to go through a full judicial proceeding. Non-judicial punishments (NJP), also known as Article 15s, are …
The Inability To Self-Diagnose Bias, Christopher Robertson
The Inability To Self-Diagnose Bias, Christopher Robertson
Faculty Scholarship
The Constitution guarantees litigants an 'impartial' jury, one that bases its judgment on the evidence presented in the courtroom, untainted by affiliations with the parties, racial animus, or media coverage that may include inadmissible facts, a one-sided portrayal, and naked opinion. Problems of juror bias arise in almost every trial – state and federal, civil and criminal - and the problem is most severe in the highest profile cases, where the need for accuracy and legitimacy in outcomes is most salient.
The Supreme Court has instructed courts to use a simple method to determine whether jurors are biased: ask them. …
The Missing American Jury: Restoring The Fundamental Constitutional Role Of The Criminal, Civil, And Grand Juries, Anna Roberts
The Missing American Jury: Restoring The Fundamental Constitutional Role Of The Criminal, Civil, And Grand Juries, Anna Roberts
Faculty Publications
(Excerpt)
This is a bold book. Professor Thomas urges that the jury—criminal, civil, and grand—be recognized as a fourth “branch” (p. 5). She asserts that procedures that have contributed to the reduction of the jury’s power—including summary judgment and state prosecution without grand juries—are unconstitutional. And, as a Plan B if her constitutional arguments do not prevail, she proposes big changes that include informing juries about sentence exposure, presenting juries with any charges that were offered in plea bargaining, and requiring that juries justify their verdicts.
State V. Thurston: An Examination Of Assualt, Self-Defense, And Trespass In Relation To Domestic Violence, Megan E. Magoon
State V. Thurston: An Examination Of Assualt, Self-Defense, And Trespass In Relation To Domestic Violence, Megan E. Magoon
Maine Law Review
Darrell Thurston and Suzanne Harmon were romantically involved on an intermittent basis for five years and had one child together. As a result of an altercation that took place at Harmon’s home in Sullivan, Maine, on September 27, 2007, between Thurston and Harmon, Thurston was charged with assault, criminal mischief, and obstructing report of crime or injury. The testimony during the trial illuminated the major factual differences between Thurston’s and Harmon’s accounts of the night the incident took place. Thurston requested a self defense jury instruction based on his version of what had happened, which the trial court ultimately denied. …
Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky
Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky
Erwin Chemerinsky
No abstract provided.
Bias In Blue: Instructing Jurors To Consider The Testimony Of Police Officer Witnesses With Caution, Vida B. Johnson
Bias In Blue: Instructing Jurors To Consider The Testimony Of Police Officer Witnesses With Caution, Vida B. Johnson
Pepperdine Law Review
Jurors in criminal trials are instructed by the judge that they are to treat the testimony of a police officer just like the testimony of any other witness. Fact-finders are told that they should not give police officer testimony greater or lesser weight than any other witness they will hear from at trial. Jurors are to accept that police are no more believable or less believable than anyone else. Jury instructions regarding police officer testimony stand in contrast to the instructions given to jurors when a witness with a legally recognized interest in the outcome of the case has testified. …
Decision-Making In The Dark: How Pre-Trial Errors Change The Narrative In Criminal Jury Trials, Kara Mackillop, Neil Vidmar
Decision-Making In The Dark: How Pre-Trial Errors Change The Narrative In Criminal Jury Trials, Kara Mackillop, Neil Vidmar
Faculty Scholarship
Over the past decade and a half, a great deal of attention has rightfully been given to the issue of wrongful convictions. In 2003, Jim Dwyer, Peter Neufeld and Barry Scheck published Actual Innocence, an eyeopening treatise on the reality of wrongful convictions in the United States. In the years since, more than 1400 innocent persons have been exonerated, and a very diverse research community of attorneys, academics, social scientists, and activists has developed in response to the realization offlaws in our criminal justice system. In 2012, Brandon Garrett's Convicting the Innocent quantitatively evaluated the first 250 DNA exonerations and …
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The , James L. Kainen
James L. Kainen
Crawford v. Washington’s historical approach to the confrontation clause establishes that testimonial hearsay inadmissible without confrontation at the founding is similarly inadmissible today, despite whether it fits a subsequently developed hearsay exception. Consequently, the requirement of confrontation depends upon whether an out-of-court statement is hearsay, testimonial, and, if so, whether it was nonetheless admissible without confrontation at the founding. A substantial literature has developed about whether hearsay statements are testimonial or were, like dying declarations, otherwise admissible at the founding. In contrast, this article focuses on the first question – whether statements are hearsay – which scholars have thus far …
Putting The Microscope On Crime Labs: The Effects Of Evidence Complexity And Laboratory Type On Jurors' Perceptions Of Forensic Evidence, Miliaikeala S.J. Heen
Putting The Microscope On Crime Labs: The Effects Of Evidence Complexity And Laboratory Type On Jurors' Perceptions Of Forensic Evidence, Miliaikeala S.J. Heen
UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones
An experiment was conducted to test the effects of evidence complexity and laboratory type on jurors' perceptions of forensic evidence. The study specifically focused on three types of labs: public labs, private labs, and "corporate labs." Public labs are managed by a federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, where evidence is usually analyzed internally at an agency. Private labs are those that have been formed as private businesses to provide services to federal, state, and local crime labs with overflow work. Corporate labs are managed by major retail corporations, and primarily service the needs of their store businesses, but …
The Jury Wants To Take The Podium -- But Even With The Authority To Do So, Can It? An Interdisciplinary Examination Of Jurors' Questioning Of Witnesses At Trial, Mitchell J. Frank
The Jury Wants To Take The Podium -- But Even With The Authority To Do So, Can It? An Interdisciplinary Examination Of Jurors' Questioning Of Witnesses At Trial, Mitchell J. Frank
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Some Thoughts On The Fundamentals Of An Evidence Code From The U.S. American Perspective, Paul F. Rothstein
Some Thoughts On The Fundamentals Of An Evidence Code From The U.S. American Perspective, Paul F. Rothstein
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In the U.S. American trial system proof mainly consists of live witnesses presented in open court under oath before the judge, jury, and parties, subject to perjury laws. Cross-examination of the witnesses in that setting is the principal (though not the only) form of testing their reliability. It is for these reasons that we have a rule against hearsay (second-hand reporting in court of what someone has said outside of court).
Why Federal Rule Of Evidence 403 Is Unconstitutional, And Why That Matters, Kenneth S. Klein
Why Federal Rule Of Evidence 403 Is Unconstitutional, And Why That Matters, Kenneth S. Klein
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Juror Typologies And Dna Comprehension:Who Benefits From Jury Trial Innovations?, Mari Sakiyama, Joel D. Lieberman
Juror Typologies And Dna Comprehension:Who Benefits From Jury Trial Innovations?, Mari Sakiyama, Joel D. Lieberman
Graduate Research Symposium (GCUA) (2010 - 2017)
When DNA evidence is presented in the courtroom, it is typically accompanied by complex testimony conveying information such as the method of generating population frequencies, match criteria and probabilities, as well as laboratory errors and error rates. Although this evidence may have high probative value, the legal community has expressed growing concern regarding jurors’ ability to comprehend it. However, courts have implemented a variety of jury trial innovations to facilitate jurors’ ability to process complex information. Although these innovations may have a positive effect on comprehension of complex trial evidence, it is unclear whether some jurors are more likely to …
Defying Dna: Rethinking The Role Of The Jury In An Age Of Scientific Proof Of Innocence, Andrea L. Roth
Defying Dna: Rethinking The Role Of The Jury In An Age Of Scientific Proof Of Innocence, Andrea L. Roth
Andrea L Roth
In 1946, public outrage erupted after a jury ordered Charlie Chaplin to support a child who, according to apparently definitive blood tests, was not his. Half a century later, juries have again defied apparently definitive evidence of innocence, finding criminal defendants guilty based on a confession or eyewitness notwithstanding exculpatory DNA test results. One might expect judges in such cases to direct an acquittal, on grounds that the evidence is legally insufficient because no rational juror could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Yet few if any do. Instead, courts defer to juries when they form an actual belief in …
Narrative, Truth, And Trial, Lisa Kern Griffin
Narrative, Truth, And Trial, Lisa Kern Griffin
Faculty Scholarship
This Article critically evaluates the relationship between constructing narratives and achieving factual accuracy at trials. The story model of adjudication— according to which jurors process testimony by organizing it into competing narratives—has gained wide acceptance in the descriptive work of social scientists and currency in the courtroom, but it has received little close attention from legal theorists. The Article begins with a discussion of the meaning of narrative and its function at trial. It argues that the story model is incomplete, and that “legal truth” emerges from a hybrid of narrative and other means of inquiry. As a result, trials …
Scientific Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: A Proposal For A Dual Standard Of Admissibility In Civil And Criminal Cases , William P. Haney Iii
Scientific Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: A Proposal For A Dual Standard Of Admissibility In Civil And Criminal Cases , William P. Haney Iii
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky
Law Enforcement And Criminal Law Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Propriety Of Jury Questioning: A Remedy For Perceived Harmless Error, Laurie Forbes Neff
The Propriety Of Jury Questioning: A Remedy For Perceived Harmless Error, Laurie Forbes Neff
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Theory Of The Perverse Verdict, Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo
A Theory Of The Perverse Verdict, Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo
Bethel G.A Erastus-Obilo
The concept of a perverse verdict is one that pervades the Criminal justice system of nearly all common law jurisdictions. The English Criminal Justice system is no exception and the concept has become institutionalised as if it were a true occurrence. This paper challenges the idea and argues that it is, technically, a legal non-event given the system of trial by jury. The theory is that besides the jury, no one else is invested with the power and authority to declare a verdict and this position is supported both by legal custom and the mechanism of the criminal justice system. …
Making Stuff Up, Richard H. Underwood
Making Stuff Up, Richard H. Underwood
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
Beginning with an article in this Journal almost thirty years ago, Professor Underwood continues to research and write about legal ethics and litigation. In this Commentary, he offers a witty look at several cases where, in his opinion, the judge allowed improper arguments to the jury.
Criminal Law And Procedure, Michael T. Judge, Stephen R. Mccullough
Criminal Law And Procedure, Michael T. Judge, Stephen R. Mccullough
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler
Faculty Scholarship
Crawford v. Washington’s historical approach to the confrontation clause establishes that testimonial hearsay inadmissible without confrontation at the founding is similarly inadmissible today, despite whether it fits a subsequently developed hearsay exception. Consequently, the requirement of confrontation depends upon whether an out-of-court statement is hearsay, testimonial, and, if so, whether it was nonetheless admissible without confrontation at the founding. A substantial literature has developed about whether hearsay statements are testimonial or were, like dying declarations, otherwise admissible at the founding. In contrast, this article focuses on the first question – whether statements are hearsay – which scholars have thus far …
Criminal Law And Procedure, Marla G. Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough
Criminal Law And Procedure, Marla G. Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
More Views From The Ivory Tower: The Kiss Principle - Keep It Simple, Solicitor, David Spratt
More Views From The Ivory Tower: The Kiss Principle - Keep It Simple, Solicitor, David Spratt
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
Can A Jury Believe My Eyes, And Should Courts Let Experts Tell Them Why Not? The Admissibility Of Expert Testimony On Cross-Racial Eyewitness Identification In New York After People V. Young, Jody E. Frampton
Pace Law Review
No abstract provided.
The “Csi Effect”: Better Jurors Through Television And Science?, Michael D. Mann
The “Csi Effect”: Better Jurors Through Television And Science?, Michael D. Mann
ExpressO
This Comment discusses how television shows such as CSI and Law & Order create heightened juror expectations. This will be published in the Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal's 2005-2006 issue.
The Perils Of Courtroom Stories, Stephan Landsman
The Perils Of Courtroom Stories, Stephan Landsman
Michigan Law Review
As Janet Malcolm1 tells it, Sheila McGough was a middle-aged single woman living at home with her parents and working as an editor and administrator in the publications department of the Carnegie Institute when she decided to switch careers and go to law school. She applied and was admitted to the then recently accredited law school at George Mason University. After graduation, she began a solo practice in northern Virginia that involved a significant amount of stateappointed criminal defense work. In 1986, approximately four years after her graduation from law school, McGough received a call requesting assistance from an incarcerated …
The Jury And Scientific Evidence, Richard O. Lempert
The Jury And Scientific Evidence, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
Read court decisions and commentaries from 100, or evenfive years ago, and you will find that experts and scientific evidence were causing problems then just as they are causing problems now. I do not think that Daubert, Kumho Tire, or any change in a rule of evidence will keep expert scientific testimony from being a difficult area for the legal system. Yet we must still ask: "What are the best terms on which to deal with scientific experts, and how can weimprove the system?"
Rule 701: Opinion Testimony By Lay Witnesses
Expert Testimony, Barry C. Scheck