Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Race, Gatekeeping, Magical Words, And The Rules Of Evidence, I. Bennett Capers
Race, Gatekeeping, Magical Words, And The Rules Of Evidence, I. Bennett Capers
Faculty Scholarship
Although it might not be apparent from the Federal Rules of Evidence themselves, or the common law that preceded them, there is a long history in this country of tying evidence—what is deemed relevant, what is deemed trustworthy—to race. And increasingly, evidence scholars are excavating that history. Indeed, not just excavating, but showing how that history has racial effects that continue into the present.
One area that has escaped racialized scrutiny—at least of the type I am interested in—is that of expert testimony. In this brief Essay written for the Vanderbilt Law Review Symposium, Reimagining the Rules of Evidence at …
Binding Hercules: A Proposal For Bench Trials, Maggie Wittlin
Binding Hercules: A Proposal For Bench Trials, Maggie Wittlin
Faculty Scholarship
Should the Federal Rules of Evidence apply at bench trials? By their own terms, they apply, but courts have been reluctant to enforce them on themselves with the same rigor that they enforce them on juries. Scholarship on the issue has been mixed. Although McCormick deemed the rules of evidence "absurdly inappropriate" outside of the jury context, more recently, scholars have suggested that many reasons for imposing exclusionary rules on jurors also apply to judges. Yet practical problems persist. For one, once judge evaluate the admissibility of evidence, they can’t “unring the bell” and ignore evidence they've decided to exclude. …
Theorizing Corroboration, Maggie Wittlin
Theorizing Corroboration, Maggie Wittlin
Faculty Scholarship
A child makes an out-of-court statement accusing an adult of abuse. That statement is important proof, but it also presents serious reliability concerns. When deciding whether it is sufficiently reliable to be admitted, should a court consider whether the child’s statement is corroborated—whether, for example, there is medical evidence of abuse? More broadly, should courts consider corroboration when deciding whether evidence is reliable enough to be admitted at trial? Judges, rule-makers, and scholars have taken significantly divergent approaches to this question and come to different conclusions.
This Article argues that there is a key problem with using corroboration to evaluate …
The Myth Of The Double- Edged Sword: An Empirical Study Of Neuroscience Evidence In Criminal Cases, Deborah W. Denno
The Myth Of The Double- Edged Sword: An Empirical Study Of Neuroscience Evidence In Criminal Cases, Deborah W. Denno
Faculty Scholarship
This Article presents the results of my unique study of 800 criminal cases addressing neuroscience evidence over the past two decades (1992–2012). Many legal scholars have theorized about the impact of neuroscience evidence on the criminal law, but this is the first empirical study of its kind to systematically investigate how courts assess the mitigating and aggravating strength of such evidence. My analysis reveals that neuroscience evidence is usually offered to mitigate punishments in the way that traditional criminal law has always allowed, especially in the penalty phase of death penalty trials. This finding controverts the popular image of neuroscience …
Keeping The Reformist Spirit Alive In Evidence Law Tribute, Stephen A. Saltzburg, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Keeping The Reformist Spirit Alive In Evidence Law Tribute, Stephen A. Saltzburg, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Challenging Witness Competency , Michael M. Martin
Challenging Witness Competency , Michael M. Martin
Faculty Scholarship
Despite the modern trend to hear all the evidence, a surprising number of witnesses can still be challenged on competency grounds.