Law Commons^™

Hearsay And The Confrontation Clause, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This speech was delivered to the Wicomico Co. Bar Association on October 28th, 2016. It is an updated version of the 2012 speech, available at http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/all_fac/924/ .

Overview: Only an out-of-court statement ("OCS") offered for the truth of the matter that was being asserted by the out-of-court declarant ("declarant") at the time when s/he made the OCS ("TOMA") = hearsay ("HS"). If evidence is not HS, the HS rule cannot exclude it. The Confrontation Clause also applies only to HS, but even then, only to its subcategory comprising "testimonial hearsay." Cross-references to "MD-EV" are to section numbers of L. MCLAIN, …

Interstate Conflict And Cooperation In Criminal Cases: An American Perspective, Jenia I. Turner

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Over the last decade, the European Union has adopted legislation that calls for the mutual recognition of arrest warrants, investigation orders, and penal judgments. These laws have aimed to strengthen the Union’s response to transnational crime, and EU policymakers are currently considering legislation to further harmonize the Union's law enforcement efforts. This Article compares these developments within the EU to the U.S. legal framework on mutual recognition in criminal matters. It examines the individual, state and systemic interests that U.S. state courts have considered in deciding whether to recognize other states' judgments, warrants, or investigative actions. These competing interests have …

Traditional Tests For Implication Of Terms Prevail In Singapore Despite ‘Acceptance’ Of Belize Test: Sembcorp Marine Ltd V Ppl Holdings Pte Ltd, Yihan Goh

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

There is an ongoing legal debate concerning the test governing the implication of terms in fact, prompted in no small measure by Lord Hoffmann’s influential speech in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom. In Belize, Lord Hoffmann famously said that the question for a court considering whether a term should be implied is ‘whether such a [term] would spell out in express words what the instrument, read against the relevant background, would reasonably be understood to mean’. This has generally been regarded by judges3 and academics4 as subsuming the implication of terms within the broader rubric of ‘interpretation’. The …

Expanding The Scope Of The Good-Faith Exception To The Exclusionary Rule To Include A Law Enforcement Officer's Reasonable Reliance On Well-Settled Case Law That Is Subsequently Overruled, Ross Oklewicz

Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

In 2009, the Supreme Court handed down several important decisions on criminal procedure. Perhaps unanticipated at the time, two of those decisions have been read together by lower courts to reach dramatically different results. The emerging split has been sharp, bringing with it urgent calls for the Court to intervene.

Laying the foundation for the conflicting decisions was New York v. Belton, in which the Supreme Court held that “when a policeman has made a lawful custodial arrest of the occupant of an automobile, he may, as a contemporaneous incident of that arrest, search the passenger compartment of the automobile” …

Experts, Mental States, And Acts, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This article, written for a symposium on "Guilt v. Guiltiness: Are the Right Rules for Trying Factual Innocence Inevitably the Wrong Rules for Trying Culpability?," argues that the definition of expertise in the criminal justice system, derived in the federal courts and in most states from Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Co., should vary depending on whether the issue involved is past mental state or past conduct. While expert psychological testimony about past acts ought to be based on scientifically verifiable assertions, expert psychological testimony about subjective mental states relevant to criminal responsibility need not meet the same threshold. This …

Substance And Form In Scientific Evidence: What Daubert Didn't Do, Samuel R. Gross

Book Chapters

On its face, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals was about as easy a case as the Supreme Court gets. The plaintiff claimed that their birth defect were caused by the anti-nausea drug Bendectin, which their mothers had used during their gestation. In response to a motion for summary judgment by the defendant, the plaintiff presented affidavits of eight expert witnesses who offered their opinion - based on a variety of studies- that Bendectin was indeed the culprit. The federal district court that heard the motion granted summary judgment to the defendant, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed. Both lower court held …

Police Interrogation And Confessions, Yale Kamisar

Book Chapters

In the police interrogation room, where, until the second third of the century, police practices were unscrutinized and virtually unregulated, constitutional ideals collide with the grim realities of law enforcement.

Prior Consistent Statements, Arthur H. Travers Jr.

Publications

No abstract provided.

An Essay On The Determination Of Relevancy Under The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Arthur H. Travers Jr.

Publications

The scope of the general definition of "relevant evidence" in the Federal Rules of Evidence is ambiguous. It is unclear whether Congress, for instance, intended that certain issues be considered legislatively determined or that those issues rest within the discretion of the courts. There is also some uncertainty over the definition's applicability to several types of evidence--particularly undisputed facts such as those that provide background information or are judicially admitted.

Practical Pitfalls In Handling Scientific Evidence, John W. Reed

Book Chapters

In this article we are concerned with the techniques of what is more often an art than a science. Before going into the specifics, it is useful to take a look at scientific evidence in general-where it stands in relationship to other kinds of evidence, on what theory or theories it is admitted, and how to maximize its effect when it is admitted.

Developments In The Law Of Coerced Confessions, Howard Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

Current Decision, Due Process--Use Of Blood Tests To Determine Intoxication Not Violative Of Due Process, Howard Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.