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

Law Commons

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

Series

Evidence

1999

Institution
Keyword
Publication

Articles 1 - 30 of 30

Full-Text Articles in Law

How Much Justice Hangs In The Balance? A New Look At Hung Jury Rates, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Valerie P. Hans, G. Thomas Munsterman Oct 1999

How Much Justice Hangs In The Balance? A New Look At Hung Jury Rates, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Valerie P. Hans, G. Thomas Munsterman

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Reports of apparent increases in the number of hung juries in some jurisdictions have caused concern among policy makers. A 1995 report by the California District Attorneys Association cited hung jury rates in 1994 that exceeded 15 percent in some jurisdictions (the rates varied from 3 to 23 percent across the nine counties for which data were available). In 1996, the District of Columbia Superior Court reported a higher-than-expected hung jury rate of 11 percent. Why juries hang at these rates isn't clear, but some commentators have claimed that hung juries are the product of eccentric or nullifying holdout jurors …


Formal Legal Truth And Substantive Truth In Judicial Fact-Finding – Their Justified Divergence In Some Particular Cases, Robert S. Summers Sep 1999

Formal Legal Truth And Substantive Truth In Judicial Fact-Finding – Their Justified Divergence In Some Particular Cases, Robert S. Summers

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Truth is a fundamental objective of adjudicative processes; ideally, ‘substantive’ as distinct from ‘formal legal’ truth. But problems of evidence, for example, may frustrate finding of substantive truth; other values may lead to exclusions of probative evidence, e.g., for the sake of fairness. ‘Jury nullification’ and ‘jury equity’. Limits of time, and definitiveness of decision, require allocation of burden of proof. Degree of truth-formality is variable within a system and across systems.


The Jury And Scientific Evidence, Richard O. Lempert Sep 1999

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?"


Text, Context And The Problem With Rape, Katharine K. Baker Feb 1999

Text, Context And The Problem With Rape, Katharine K. Baker

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


The Standard Of Appellate Review For Scientific Evidence: Beyond Joiner And Scheffer, Randolph N. Jonakait Jan 1999

The Standard Of Appellate Review For Scientific Evidence: Beyond Joiner And Scheffer, Randolph N. Jonakait

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.


Looking For Policy In All The Wrong Places: A Comment On The Strategies Of "The Race And Gender Crowd" Toward Evidence Law, David L. Faigman Jan 1999

Looking For Policy In All The Wrong Places: A Comment On The Strategies Of "The Race And Gender Crowd" Toward Evidence Law, David L. Faigman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Some Thoughts On The Conduct/Status Distinction, Sherry F. Colb Jan 1999

Some Thoughts On The Conduct/Status Distinction, Sherry F. Colb

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


The Arizona Jury Reform Permitting Civil Jury Trial Discussions: The View Of Trial Participants, Judges, And Jurors, Valerie P. Hans, Paula Hannaford-Agor, G. Thomas Munsterman Jan 1999

The Arizona Jury Reform Permitting Civil Jury Trial Discussions: The View Of Trial Participants, Judges, And Jurors, Valerie P. Hans, Paula Hannaford-Agor, G. Thomas Munsterman

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In 1995, the Arizona Supreme Court reformed the jury trial process by allowing civil jurors to discuss the evidence presented during trial prior to their formal deliberations. This Article examines the theoretical, legal, and policy issues raised by this reform and presents the early results of a field experiment that tested the impact of trial discussions. Jurors, judges, attorneys, and litigants in civil jury trials in Arizona were questioned regarding their observations, experiences, and reactions during trial as well as what they perceived to be the benefits and drawback of juror discussions. The data revealed that the majority of judges …


Defense Discovery In White Collar Criminal Prosecutions, Peter J. Henning Jan 1999

Defense Discovery In White Collar Criminal Prosecutions, Peter J. Henning

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.


Guarding The Gate To The Courthouse: How Trial Judges Are Using Their Evidentiary Screening Role To Remake Tort Causation Rules, Lucinda M. Finley Jan 1999

Guarding The Gate To The Courthouse: How Trial Judges Are Using Their Evidentiary Screening Role To Remake Tort Causation Rules, Lucinda M. Finley

Journal Articles

The article looks at what trial judges are actually doing in toxic tort cases in the post-Daubert world; it reviews and critiques cases in which judges have in effect adopted a new rule of causation law that requires plaintiffs to rely on epidemiology, and in particular epidemiology that demonostrates an increase in relative risk of 2.0 or greater; the article considers the substantive as well as the normative implications of this legal treatment of epidemiology.


Evidence: 1997-1998 Survey Of New York Law, Faust Rossi Jan 1999

Evidence: 1997-1998 Survey Of New York Law, Faust Rossi

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


The Business Records Exception To The Hearsay Rule - New Is Not Necessarily Better, Sidney Kwestel Jan 1999

The Business Records Exception To The Hearsay Rule - New Is Not Necessarily Better, Sidney Kwestel

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.


Etchings On Glass: Reflections On The Science Of Proof, Louise Harmon Jan 1999

Etchings On Glass: Reflections On The Science Of Proof, Louise Harmon

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.


Would A Market-Based Test Clarify Entrapment?, Roger C. Park Jan 1999

Would A Market-Based Test Clarify Entrapment?, Roger C. Park

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


When Justice Fails: Indemnification For Unjust Conviction, Adele Bernhard Jan 1999

When Justice Fails: Indemnification For Unjust Conviction, Adele Bernhard

Articles & Chapters

The first section of this article reviews the evidence, both historical and contemporary, documenting the existence and frequency of wrongful convictions. The next dissects an actual case to illustrate how an innocent person can be convicted and why, once the error has been corrected and the conviction is vacated, that person generally has no legal action for damages in the absence of indemnification legislation. The third section argues that society has a moral obligation to assist the wrongfully convicted; that indemnification legislation is a better approach than reliance on ''moral obligation" bills; and that enacting legislation is possible - just …


Some Thoughts On The Evidentiary Aspects Of Technologically Produced Or Presented Evidence, Fredric I. Lederer Jan 1999

Some Thoughts On The Evidentiary Aspects Of Technologically Produced Or Presented Evidence, Fredric I. Lederer

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


On Generalizations I: A Preliminary Exploration, Terence J. Anderson Jan 1999

On Generalizations I: A Preliminary Exploration, Terence J. Anderson

Articles

No abstract provided.


Apology Excepted: Incorporating A Feminist Analysis Into Evidence Policy Where You Would Least Expect It, Aviva A. Orenstein Jan 1999

Apology Excepted: Incorporating A Feminist Analysis Into Evidence Policy Where You Would Least Expect It, Aviva A. Orenstein

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.


Lilly V. Virginia: A Chance To Reconceptualize The Confrontation Right, Richard D. Friedman Jan 1999

Lilly V. Virginia: A Chance To Reconceptualize The Confrontation Right, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

In Lilly v. Virginia, the Supreme Court once again has the opportunity to grapple with the meaning of the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendmel).t. The basic facts of Lilly are simple, for they present the ageold problem of accomplice confessions. Three men, Gary Barker and Ben and Mark Lilly, went on a crime spree, during which one of them shot to death a young man they had robbed and kidnaped. Ben Lilly was charged with being the triggerman, and Barker testified to that effect at Ben's trial. Mark did not testify. But Mark had made a statement to the …


Confessions, Search And Seizure And The Rehnquist Court, Yale Kamisar Jan 1999

Confessions, Search And Seizure And The Rehnquist Court, Yale Kamisar

Articles

About the time William Rehnquist ascended to the Chief Justiceship of the United States, two events occurred that increased the likelihood that Miranda would enjoy a long life. In Moran v. Burbine,' a 6-3 majority held that a confession preceded by an otherwise valid waiver of a suspect's Miranda rights should not be excluded either (a) because the police misled an inquiring attorney when they told her they were not going to question the suspect she called about or (b) because the police failed to inform the suspect of the attorney's efforts to reach him.


Lost Lives: Miscarriages Of Justice In Capital Cases, Samuel R. Gross Jan 1999

Lost Lives: Miscarriages Of Justice In Capital Cases, Samuel R. Gross

Articles

In case after case, erroneous conviction for capital murder has been proven. I contend that these are not disconnected accidents, but systematic consequences of the nature of homicice prosecution in the general and capital prosecution in particular - that in this respect, as in others, death distorts and undermines the course of the law.


Regulating The Market For Snitches , Ian Weinstein Jan 1999

Regulating The Market For Snitches , Ian Weinstein

Faculty Scholarship

These are boom times for the sellers and buyers of cooperation in the federal criminal justice system. While prosecutors have always welcomed the assistance of snitches, tougher federal sentencing laws have led to a significant increase in cooperation as more defendants try to provide "substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecution of another person," to have some chance of receiving a significant sentence reduction. In 1996 one of every five defendants sentenced in the federal courts won mitigation by providing substantial assistance. Many more defendants tried but failed to close the deal. The overheated cooperation market is creating serious problems …


Impeachment: Evidence Amendments, Paul C. Giannelli Jan 1999

Impeachment: Evidence Amendments, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


Dna Database Searches And The Legal Consumption Of Scientific Evidence, Peter Donnelly, Richard D. Friedman Jan 1999

Dna Database Searches And The Legal Consumption Of Scientific Evidence, Peter Donnelly, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

DNA evidence has transformed the proof of identity in criminal litigation, but it has also introduced daunting problems of statistical analysis into the process. In this Article, we analyze a problem related to DNA evidence that is likely to be of great and increasing significance in the near future. This is the problem of whether, and how, to present evidence that the suspect has been identified through a DNA database search. In our view, the two well-known reports on DNA evidence issued by the National Research Council ("NRC"), each of which has carried great authority with the American courts on …


Taking Notes: Subpoenas And Just Compensation, Gary S. Lawson Jan 1999

Taking Notes: Subpoenas And Just Compensation, Gary S. Lawson

Faculty Scholarship

Few cases from the October 1997 Supreme Court term received as much public attention as Swidler & Berlin v United States, which held that the attorney-client privilege survives the death of the client in federal criminal proceedings. If one focuses solely on the issue actually decided in the case, that degree of attention is surprising. The issue had not generated a split among the federal circuits, and there were relatively few decisions-federal or state-squarely on point. The Court's holding was thus unlikely to have a major impact on American law; the paucity of prior case law demonstrates that the question …


Iola And Daubert (Symposium: The Supreme Court And Local Government Law: The 1997-98 Term), Leon D. Lazer Jan 1999

Iola And Daubert (Symposium: The Supreme Court And Local Government Law: The 1997-98 Term), Leon D. Lazer

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.


Interpretation Of The Kentucky Rules Of Evidence—What Happened To The Common Law?, Robert G. Lawson Jan 1999

Interpretation Of The Kentucky Rules Of Evidence—What Happened To The Common Law?, Robert G. Lawson

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The Kentucky Rules of Evidence, which became effective on July 1, 1992, dramatically transformed the method by which lawyers and judges address evidence issues. Before the adoption of the Rules, the law of evidence consisted mostly of a vast collection of common law rulings, accumulated over two centuries and inaccessible to lawyers and judges for all practical purposes. In addressing an evidence issue, participants had to first deal with the problem of "finding" the law-distilling from a morass of conflicting common law precedents the ones applicable to the issue at hand, a task regularly producing contention rather than agreement and, …


The Three Threats To Miranda, Yale Kamisar Jan 1999

The Three Threats To Miranda, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Miranda v. Arizona (1966) was the centerpiece of the Warren Court's "revolution" in American criminal procedure. Moreover, as Professor Stephen Schulhofer of the University of Chicago Law School has recently noted, a numbir of the Miranda safeguards "have now become entrenched in the interrogation procedures of many countries around the world." But Miranda is in serious trouble at home.


Confrontation Confronted, Richard D. Friedman, Margaret A. Berger, Steven R. Shapiro Jan 1999

Confrontation Confronted, Richard D. Friedman, Margaret A. Berger, Steven R. Shapiro

Articles

The following article is an edited version of the amicus curiae brief filed with the Supreme Court of the United States in the October Term, 1998, in the case of Benjamin Lee Lilly v. Commonwealth of Virginia (No. 98-5881). "This case raises important questions about the meaning of the confrontation clause, which has been a vital ingredient of the fair trial right for hundreds of years," Professor Richard Friedman and his co-authors say. "In particular, this case presents the Court with an opportunity to reconsider the relationship between the confrontation clause and the law of hearsay." On June 10 the …


Narrative Relevance, Imagined Juries, And A Supreme Court Inspired Agenda For Jury Research, Richard O. Lempert Jan 1999

Narrative Relevance, Imagined Juries, And A Supreme Court Inspired Agenda For Jury Research, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

This paper has its roots in Old Chief v. United States, a case the Supreme Court of the United States decided in 1997. I will begin by describing this case; then comment on its implications for the Supreme Court's conception of the jury, and conclude by examining the agenda one may draw from it for empirical jury research. Old Chief arose when Johnny Lynn Old Chief was charged not only with assault with a dangerous weapon and using a firearm in the commission of a crime of violence, but also with violating a law that precludes convicted felons from possessing …