Law Commons^™

The History Of Forensic-Science Evidence In Criminal Trials And The Role Of Early “Success” In Establishing Its Putative Reliability, Carrie Leonetti

St. Mary's Law Journal

This Article posits the history of forensic-science evidence plays a significant role in the unquestioning manner of its modern acceptance. It traces early high-profile forensic science “successes” and the public reactions to them. It argues the public perception of the “advances” of forensic science continues to play a role in the lack of scrutiny given to these disciplines in admissibility decisions today. It concludes, when it comes to forensic science, history should play a different role by serving as a critical warning rather than a congratulatory buttress.

Saving America’S Privacy Rights: Why Carpenter V. United States Was Wrongly Decided And Why Courts Should Be Promoting Legislative Reform Rather Than Extending Existing Privacy Jurisprudence, David Stone

St. Mary's Law Journal

Privacy rights are under assault, but the Supreme Court’s judicial intervention into the issue, starting with Katz v. United States and leading to the Carpenter v. United States decision has created an inconsistent, piecemeal common law of privacy that forestalls a systematic public policy resolution by Congress and the states. In order to reach a satisfactory and longlasting resolution of the problem consistent with separation of powers principles, the states should consider a constitutional amendment that reduces the danger of pervasive technologyaided surveillance and monitoring, together with a series of statutes addressing each new issue posed by technological change as …

Causation And "Legal Certainty" In Legal Malpractice Law, Vincent R. Johnson

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

A line of California cases holds that causation of damages in legal malpractice actions must be proven with “legal certainty.” This Article argues that judicial references to legal certainty are ambiguous and threaten to undermine the fairness of legal malpractice litigation as a means for resolving lawyer-client disputes. Courts should eschew the language of legal certainty and plainly state that damages are recoverable if a legal malpractice plaintiff proves, by a preponderance of the evidence, that those losses were factually and proximately caused by the defendant’s breach of duty.

The Paragraph 20 Paradox: An Evaluation Of The Enforcement Of Ethical Rules As Substantive Law, Donald E. Campbell

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

This Article addresses an issue courts across the country continue to struggle with: When are ethics rules appropriately considered enforceable substantive obligations, and when should they only be enforceable through the disciplinary process? The question is complicated by the ethics rules themselves. Paragraph 20 of the Scope section of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct includes seemingly contradictory guidance; it states the Rules are not to be used to establish civil liability, but also that they can be “some evidence” of a violation of a lawyer’s standard of care. Most states have adopted this paradoxal Paragraph 20 language. Consequently, courts …

Hearsay In The Smiley Face: Analyzing The Use Of Emojis As Evidence, Erin Janssen

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

John Henry Wigmore And The Rules Of Evidence: The Hidden Origins Of Modern Law (Book Review), Michael Ariens

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

The Texas Rules Of Evidence: Something Old, Something New, And Something Changed, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

On November 19, 2014, the Texas Supreme Court issued an Order amending all of the Texas Rules of Evidence, effective April 1, 2015. In its Order, the Court explained that the amendments were part of an effort to “restyle” the Rules, to make them as consistent as possible with the Federal Rules of Evidence, and to make them easier to understand.

The 2015 amendments to the Texas Rules of Evidence are a commendable step toward making the Rules more user-friendly. It is clear to even the casual reader that the reformatting of the Rules, through the use of consistent and …

A Death At Crooked Creek: The Case Of The Cowboy, The Cigarmaker, And The Love Letter, By Marianne Wesson (Book Review), Michael S. Ariens

Faculty Articles

Marianne Wesson’s A Death at Crooked Creek tells the story of one of the most intriguing mysteries in American legal history. For evidence teachers, and possibly even law students, Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Hillmon is a classic nineteenth century mystery story. The case raises the question: Was the deceased John W. Hillmon, who had recently taken out the extraordinary sum of $25,000 in life insurance, or was it Frederick Adolph Walters, an itinerant who had left Iowa a year earlier?

In addition to teaching at the University of Colorado School of Law, Wesson is the author of three mystery …

She Acts Guilty: Sexually Charged Consciousness Of Guilt Evidence Should Be Excluded Because It Is Biased Against Women., Colin Caffrey

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

A lawyer may submit sexually charged evidence under a consciousness of guilt theory. Utilizing this type of evidence convicts women based on their character, not for their alleged crimes, in criminal cases across America. Consciousness of guilt evidence holds bias because it exploits common gender stereotypes in order to obtain criminal convictions. Sexually charged evidence does not directly show a defendant’s guilt, but simply allows the jury to infer guilt based on a defendant’s conduct. Violating gender norms or reacting to the occurrence of a tragedy differently than one might normally expect is not an admission of guilt. Sexually charged …

Keep Your “Friends” Close And Your Enemies Closer: Walking The Ethical Tightrope In The Use Of Social Media., John G. Browning

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

This Article will examine the ethical issues posed by lawyers’ use of social media platforms in light of the ABA Ethics Commission 20/20 changes to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Social networking has had a transformative effect both on the way society shares information and on the legal profession. Much of the discussion to date focuses on the discovery and use of evidence from social media sites in criminal cases and civil litigation, but attention must also be directed to the ethical quandaries posed by the legal profession’s use of social media. This Article will consider issues such as …

Evidentiary Standards In The Legal Malpractice Trial-Within-A-Trial., F. Parks Brown

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

Like malpractice actions in general, the standards of proof required for each element of a legal malpractice claim evolved as legal malpractice claims became increasingly common. State and federal courts consequently produced a diverse range of opinions as jurisdictions continually adjust to evolving standards. The courts often seek to balance these standards of proof against their own precedent and the need to serve their particular notions of equity and justice. Perhaps the most contentious of these evolving standards of proof is the current state of the causation element, which is a critical test that must be satisfied to prevail in …

False Security: How Courts Have Improperly Rendered The Protections Of The Protective Order Illusory, Ramona L. Lampley

Faculty Articles

The protective order is perhaps one of the most useful and “taken for granted” discovery devices contemplated by the Colorado and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The purpose of a joint protective order in civil litigation is to permit the parties to produce business information without fear that the information will be disseminated publicly, and with a court order that the information be used only for purposes of the present litigation. Blanket protective orders serve the interests of a just, speedy, and less expensive determination of complex disputes by alleviating the need for and delay occasioned by extensive and repeated …

Federal Rules Update: Rules Amended As Of December 2010, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

Amendments to the Federal Rules of Procedure and Evidence become effective three years from initial drafting by an advisory committee. Proposed amendments are considered by the respective advisory committees, then circulated for public comment, and then forwarded to the Judicial Conference’s Standing Committee on Rules. If approved by the Judicial Conference, they are sent to the Supreme Court for any appropriate changes. If Congress makes no changes after approval by the Supreme Court, the amendments automatically become effective December 1. Two proposed amendments in 2010 did not become effective because they were not submitted to Congress under the procedure outlined …

“Playing Chicken": An Instant History Of The Battle Over Exceptions To Client Confidentiality, Michael S. Ariens

Faculty Articles

The purpose of my essay Playing Chicken: An Instant History of the Battle over Exceptions to Client Confidentiality, is to offer a pointillist history of the recent battles between the ABA and the federal government concerning 1) when lawyers may or must disclose client confidences, and 2) claims that the federal government is attacking the attorney-client privilege. In doing so, I hope to explain how this battle is representative of the current drift in the American legal profession.

After the Introduction, the essay unfolds as follows: Section II traces the ABA’s often schizophrenic understanding of the duty of confidentiality and …

It's About Time: The Need For A Uniform Approach To Using A Prior Conviction To Impact A Witness., Robert F. Holland

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Texas, no uniform approach exists in determining whether to admit evidence of a prior conviction as a technique to impeach a witness. This lack of uniformity leads to significant consequences for the parties and poses a potential prejudicial effect on the truthful character of a witness. Furthermore, there is currently no bright-line judicial standard when evaluating the admissibility of certain prior convictions. Although the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in Theus v. State provided a non-exhaustive set of factors for trial judges to consider, the court has yet to clarify particular aspects of how to properly apply Texas Rule …

Punishment Evidence: Grunsfeld Ten Years Later., Edward L. Wilkinson

St. Mary's Law Journal

This Article deals with the admissible evidence during the punishment phase of a non-capital trial in Texas. In 1989, the Texas Legislature amended Article 37.07, Section 3(a) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure to widen the scope of evidence admissible during the punishment phase of a non-capital trial. Grunsfel v. State, the leading case, the Court of Criminal Appeals interpreted the statute so narrowly as to render the changes meaningless. In 1993, the legislature amended the statute a second time; it provided for a more expansive range of evidence to be introduced, but deleted a critical definition of what …

It Is Not So Simply Because An Expert Says It Is So: The Reliability Of Gang Expert Testimony Regarding Membership In Criminal Street Gangs: Pushing The Limits Of Texas Rule Of Evidence 702., Placido G. Gomez

St. Mary's Law Journal

The mechanisms developed by the criminal justice system addressing the criminal activities of street gangs, for the most part, have proved ineffective. The evolution of gangs, their complex structure, and multipurpose focus keep them one step ahead of law enforcement. The most recent weapon created to fight the war on gangs, the civil injunction, suffers from numerous inadequacies. One concern is that civil injunctions raise numerous constitutional concerns. Another is that these injunctions fall short of constitutional demands. Furthermore, the practical implementation of the injunction forces an analysis of the reliability of the gang expert’s testimony. This Article proposes courts …

Having It All: Pleading Guilty Without Forfeiting The Right To Appeal, Gerald S. Reamey

Faculty Articles

Pleading guilty and moving for an appeal of a pretrial suppression ruling has not been viewed as an efficient allocation of judicial resources. However, it is terribly inefficient to force the State to trial solely to preserve appeal rights on a pretrial objection. Attempts by courts and the legislature to balance these competing interests have produced a confusing and dangerous mix of contradictory rules.

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure (TRAP) 25.2 is the latest iteration of such rules. Appeals may be taken following a negotiated guilty plea or nolo contendere plea, if “the substance of the appeal was raised by …

A True Crime: A Review Of Janet Malcolm, The Crime Of Sheila Mcgough (Book Review), Michael Ariens

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

Texas Rule Of Evidence 503: Defining Scope Of Employment For Corporations Comment., Craig W. Saunders

St. Mary's Law Journal

The attorney-corporate client privilege should be regarded as encompassing only communications made to the corporation’s counsel by employees in the scope of their employment. The Supreme Court of Texas and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ordered the merger of the Civil and Criminal Rules of Evidence. The merger became effective on March 1, 1998 and is now known as the Texas Rules of Evidence. Although the civil and criminal rules often mirror each other, one monumental change is in the new version of Rule 503. This new version significantly alters the analysis used in a corporate context and determines …

Progress Is Our Only Product: Legal Reform And The Codification Of Evidence, Michael S. Ariens

Faculty Articles

Twentieth century reform of the American law of evidence was initially premised on the ideals of legal progressivism, ideals splintered by American legal realism. In preparing the American Law Institute's Model Code of Evidence from 1939 to 1942, Harvard Law School professor Edmund M. Morgan attempted to reconstitute the framework of reform in light of the challenge of legal realism. The Model Code was based on granting greater discretion to the trial judge and changing the goals of the trial from a search for truth to a "rational" resolution of disputes.

Morgan’s decision to emphasize the rational resolution of disputes …

Evidence, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

This article addresses some of the more significant evidence cases decided by the Fifth Circuit during the survey period.' Before turning to the cases themselves, it is important to note at the outset that like other federal courts, the Fifth Circuit is generally not inclined to reverse a case on an evidentiary error. It should not be surprising then that in most of the cases which follow, the court implicitly deferred to the decision of the trial judge in deciding whether a certain piece of evidence was admissible.

Evidence, Fifth Circuit Symposium, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

This article reviews decisions by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on evidence issues and concludes that if an attorney has any hopes of obtaining appellate relief on an evidentiary issue, it is essential that the issues be presented concisely and completely to the trial court. The appellate courts will not reverse an evidentiary ruling of a trial court, even if the trial court has erred. This deference to the trial court is in recognition of the hundreds of rulings on evidence that the trial court must conduct within the course of a trial. In order …

Interference With Prospective Civil Litigation By Spollation Of Evidence: Should Texas Adopt A New Tort., Philip A. Lionberger

St. Mary's Law Journal

Texas courts should adopt a tort for spoliation of evidence. Spoliation of evidence is the tampering with, interference with, loss of, or destruction of evidence. Spoliation of evidence is a serious legal problem because it increases a litigant’s difficulty in proving a cause of action or a defense. Evidence destruction may also increase litigation costs and cause the trial court to make factfinding errors. Texas courts should adopt the tort of spoliation of evidence because it compensates injured litigants and deters future acts of spoliation. Another reason for adopting the tort for spoliation of evidence is the inadequacy of alternative …

The Skeleton In The Closet: The Battered Woman Syndrome, Self Defense, And Expert Testimony, Victoria M. Mather

Faculty Articles

The criminal justice system must deal fairly, through the use of expert testimony, with the battered woman who strikes back at her abuser with deadly results. Society-at-large does not understand the battered woman, the batterer, and their relationship; historically, the criminal justice system’s response to the predicament of the battered woman has been ineffective.

The use of expert testimony in homicide cases where an allegedly battered wife kills her abuser and then claims self-defense is a controversial proposition. The evidence, however, shows that women are frequently the victims of abuse, that patterns of behavior associated with battering relationships usually exist, …