Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Selected Works

2010

PDF

Judges

Courts

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Forensic Science Evidence And Judicial Bias In Criminal Cases, Hon. Donald E. Shelton Jan 2010

Forensic Science Evidence And Judicial Bias In Criminal Cases, Hon. Donald E. Shelton

Hon. Donald E. Shelton

Although DNA exonerations and the NAS report have raised serious questions about the validity of many traditional non-DNA forms of forensic science evidence, criminal court judges continue to admit virtually all prosecution-proferred expert testimony. It is is suggested that this is the result of a systemic pro-prosecution bias by judges that is reflected in admissibility decisions. These "attitudinal blinders" are especially prevalent in state criminal trial and appellate courts.


Clear As Mud: How The Uncertain Precedential Status Of Unpublished Opinions Muddles Qualified Immunity Determinations, David R. Cleveland Jan 2010

Clear As Mud: How The Uncertain Precedential Status Of Unpublished Opinions Muddles Qualified Immunity Determinations, David R. Cleveland

David R. Cleveland

While unpublished opinions are now freely citeable under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1, their precedential value remains uncertain. This ambiguity muddles the already unclear law surrounding qualified immunity and denies courts valuable precedents for making fair and consistent judgments on these critical civil rights issues. When faced with a claim that they have violated a person’s civil rights, government officials typically claim qualified immunity. The test is whether they have violated “clearly established law.” Unfortunately, the federal circuits differ on whether unpublished opinions may be used in determining clearly established law. This article, Clear as Mud: How the Uncertain …