Law Commons^™

Reconceiving The Right To Present Witnesses, Richard A. Nagareda

Michigan Law Review

Modem American law is, in a sense, a system of compartments. For understandable curricular reasons, legal education sharply distinguishes the law of evidence from both constitutional law and criminal procedure. In fact, the lines of demarcation between these three subjects extend well beyond law school to the organization of the leading treatises and case headnotes to which practicing lawyers routinely refer in their trade. Many of the most interesting questions in the law, however, do not rest squarely within a single compartment; instead, they concern the content and legitimacy of the lines of demarcation themselves. This article explores a significant, …

Evidence-Hearsay-Exclusion Of Self-Serving Declarations, John M. Price S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

One of the most venerable of all legal principles is the evidentiary rule excluding hearsay. This rule, which was first espoused by the English courts in the sixteenth century, arose when it became apparent that there was an inherent danger of untrustworthiness in a witness's uncorroborated recital of a prior declaration made outside the courtroom. The courts gave several reasons for regarding hearsay as untrustworthy. First, these statements, offered into evidence for the truth of the matter asserted, were not made under oath. Secondly, objection to such testimony was raised because the trier of fact had no opportunity to pass …

Betts V. Brady Twenty Years Later: The Right To Counself And Due Process Values, Yale Kamisar

Michigan Law Review

I am quite distressed by talk that the landmark case of Mapp v. Ohio "suggests by analogy" that the Court may now overrule Betts v. Brady. For whether one talks about the fourth or the sixth amendment, there is much to be said for Justice Harlan's dissenting views in Mapp. "[W]hatever configurations ... have been developed in the particularizing federal precedents" should not be "deemed a part of 'ordered liberty,' and as such ... enforceable against the States .... [W]e would not be true to the Fourteenth Amendment were we merely to stretch the general principle [ of …

Packer: Ex-Communist Witnesses, Malcolm Sharp

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Ex-Communist Witnesses. By Herbert L. Packer

Federal Agency Investigations: Requirements For The Production Of Documents, Frank E. Cooper

Michigan Law Review

The United States district courts are frequently called upon to decide whether an administrative agency is entitled to enforcement of a subpoena requesting production of documentary evidence which the person to whom the subpoena is addressed assails as an unnecessary and improper inquisitorial investigation.

Neither the statute nor the decision-landmarks though they both are-offers a convenient rule of thumb to guide the district courts in the intensely difficult problems posed by requests for enforcement of administrative subpoenas.

However, an examination of the decisions passing upon such requests does disclose the standards by which the courts apply the three classic tests, …

Federal Agency Investigations: Procedural Rights Of The Subpoenaed Witness, Frank C. Newman

Michigan Law Review

This article is designed to help fill a gap in the literature and to warn government attorneys, particularly, about some questionable asides in the Hannah case. We shall not deal with record-keeping requirements or with agency inspections, subpoenas duces tecum, and related search and seizure problems. The focus instead is on the subpoenaed witness; that is, a man who knows that force may be used against him unless pursuant to government command he appears and answers questions. We examine several rights that may protect the witness; and we shall also ask whether the agencies, to discharge their governmental duties, truly …

Evidence - Character Testimony - Impeachment Through Reference To Prior Specific Acts Of Defendant, Lawrence E. Blades S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Defendant, on trial for arson, presented a character witness who testified that defendant's reputation in the community was good. During cross-examination the prosecutor asked if the witness had heard that defendant had been arrested for or convicted of various specific crimes in other states. No objection was made by the defense, and the trial judge took no action. The witness answered no to each question, and subsequently a jury verdict of guilty was returned. On appeal, held, reversed and remanded, three judges dissenting. Failure of the trial judge, before allowing such cross-examination, to ascertain on his own motion and …

Evidence - Examination Of Witnesses - Surprise As Grounds For Impeaching A Party's Own Witness, John A. Ziegler, Jr. S.Ed., Raymond Dittrich

Michigan Law Review

The defendant was convicted of the statutory rape of his stepdaughter. Immediately following the alleged offense, the victim had signed a statement accusing the defendant of the crime charged. Before the trial, however, the district attorney was advised by the defense counsel, and by the victim herself, that the written statement was not true. At the trial, when called as a witness by the commonwealth, the girl repudiated her earlier statement, whereupon the district attorney pleaded surprise and was permitted to use the prior statement to impeach. On appeal, held, affirmed. The district attorney was "actually surprised" when the …

Compelling The Testimony Of Political Deviants, O. John Rogge

Michigan Law Review

Besides the two specific problems which the new federal act presents, namely, whether it imposes nonjudicial functions on federal courts, and whether it should, does and can protect against the substantial danger of state prosecution, there is a general objection that one can raise against it, and to other acts of the same type: they relate to the area of belief and opinion, the very area which was involved when the English people, spearheaded by the Puritans, engaged in the struggle with the Crown that finally resulted in the establishment of a right of silence. At least if we are …

Compelling The Testimony Of Political Deviants, O. John Rogge

Michigan Law Review

At the last term the United States Supreme Court in Ullmann v. United States upheld the constitutionality of paragraph (c) of a federal act of August 1954 which seeks to compel the testimony of communists and other political deviants. Paragraph (c) relates to witnesses before federal courts and grand juries. The Court specifically left open the question of the validity of paragraphs (a) and (b) relating to congressional witnesses. Justice Frankfurter delivered the Court's opinion. Justice Douglas, with the concurrence of Justice Black, wrote a dissent.

It is our purpose to consider the background, history and terms of this compulsory …

Constitutional Law - Privilege Against Self-Incrimination -Effect Of Immunity Statute, Paul A. Heinen S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner was brought before a federal grand jury and questioned as to his and other persons' membership in the Communist Party. After petitioner refused to answer the questions on the ground that the answers would be self-incriminating and therefore his refusal was privileged under the Fifth Amendment, the United States attorney, proceeding under the provisions of the Immunity Act of 1954, filed an application in the United States district court requesting that petitioner be required to answer the questions. The district court, upholding the constitutionality of the act, ordered petitioner to answer the questions, and petitioner's appeal from this order …