Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Scientific Evidence In The Sam Sheppard Case , Paul C. Giannelli
Scientific Evidence In The Sam Sheppard Case , Paul C. Giannelli
Cleveland State Law Review
My panel is discussing reliable jury verdicts, and my topic is "scientific" evidence. One way to approach this issue is to compare scientific evidence with other methods of proof. The trial lawyers that I worked with viewed cases as falling primarily into one of three categories: eyewitness cases, confession cases, and "scientific" evidence cases. In this scheme, anything that was not an eyewitness, confession, or snitch case was a "scientific evidence" case. These categories, of course, are neither exhaustive nor mutually exclusive; often two and sometimes all three are involved. Nevertheless, these categories are helpful because they present trial attorneys …
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 …
Broken Promises And Involuntary Confessions: May A State Introduce Incriminating Statements Made By A Defendant As A Result Of Promises In A Plea Bargain Agreement If The Defendant Breaches That Agreement, Bradford C. Mank
Cleveland State Law Review
There is a substantial constitutional question concerning whether admissions made pursuant to a plea bargain that the defendant has breached are admissible under the fifth amendment's privilege against compelled self-incrimination or the due process clauses of the fifth and fourteenth amendments. Courts have reached conflicting results in regard to whether such statements are voluntary.10 This Article argues that it is difficult to resolve whether such admissions are voluntary because courts have not provided a clear definition as to under what circumstances a confession is voluntary in accordance with the dictates of the fifth and fourteenth amendments. Instead of focusing on …