Law Commons^™

Expert Testimony On Rape Trauma Syndrome: An Argument For Limited Admissibility—State V. Black, 109 Wash. 2d 336, 745 P.2d 12 (1987), Deborah A. Dwyer

Washington Law Review

In State v. Black, the Washington Supreme Court faced the question of whether the State, in a rape case, should be allowed to offer expert testimony on rape trauma syndrome ("RTS"). After examining some of the relevant scientific literature, case law, and the standards governing the admissibility of expert testimony, the court held that expert testimony on RTS was inadmissible. The court based its decision on findings that RTS testimony lacks scientific reliability, and that it unfairly prejudices a defendant accused of rape. The court's holding in Black was based on a misinterpretation of the available scientific literature, and on …

Expert Testimony On Rape Trauma Syndrome: An Argument For Limited Admissibility—State V. Black, 109 Wash. 2d 336, 745 P.2d 12 (1987), Deborah A. Dwyer

Washington Law Review

In State v. Black, the Washington Supreme Court faced the question of whether the State, in a rape case, should be allowed to offer expert testimony on rape trauma syndrome ("RTS"). After examining some of the relevant scientific literature, case law, and the standards governing the admissibility of expert testimony, the court held that expert testimony on RTS was inadmissible. The court based its decision on findings that RTS testimony lacks scientific reliability, and that it unfairly prejudices a defendant accused of rape. The court's holding in Black was based on a misinterpretation of the available scientific literature, and on …

Twist And Shout And Truth Will Out: An Argument For The Adoption Of A "Safety-Valve" Exception To The Washington Hearsay Rule, George R. Nock

Seattle University Law Review

This Article will focus on two decisions of the Washington Supreme Court illustrating the unfortunate expansion of certain hearsay exceptions in order to accommodate truth, show that the expansion could have been avoided had Washington adopted a "general" exception comparable to that found in the Federal Rules of Evidence, and propose the adoption of an exception shorn of the defects of the rejected federal version.

Balancing The Right To Confrontation And The Need To Protect Child Sexual Abuse Victims: Are Statutes Authorizing Televised Testimony Serving Their Purpose?, Kimberley Seals Bressler

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment begins by providing a brief outline of the procedures regulating the use of televised testimony. Next, against the larger backdrop of the history of the right to confrontation, Part III addresses the treatment of televised testimony as hearsay. This section presents a recent Maryland decision as an illustration of the undesirable analogy of televised testimony to hearsay that leads to a more difficult admission standard. Part III concludes with the argument that televised testimony is the functional equivalent of in-court testimony, and thus, a hearsay analysis is inappropriate. Part IV of this Comment presents a recent Supreme Court …

The Meaning Of Probative Value And Prejudice In Federal Rule Of Evidence 403: Can Rule 403 Be Used To Resurrect The Common Law Of Evidence?, Edward J. Imwinkelried

Vanderbilt Law Review

In the common law system of evidence, logically relevant evidence is presumptively admissible. The logical relevance of an item of evidence, however, does not guarantee its admission. The common law has developed a number of rules that exclude logically relevant evidence. In some cases, the common law excludes evidence because of doubts about the credibility or reliability of that type of evidence. For example, the best evidence rule rests primarily on skepticism about the trustworthiness of secondary evidence concerning a document's contents.- When the issue is the content of a document, the common law prefers that the document itself be …

Reverse Silver Platter: Should Evidence That State Officials Obtained In Violation Of A State Constitution Be Admissible In A Federal Criminal Trial?

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Evidence—The Confrontation Clause—A Literal Right To A Face-To-Face Meeting. Coy V. Iowa, 108 S. Ct. 2798 (1988)., Tammera L. Rankin

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Admissibility Of Former Testimony Under Rule 804(B)(1): Defining A Predecessor In Interest, Mark Lawrence

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Cross-Examination Of Expert Witnesses: Dispelling The Aura Of Reliability, Lee Waldman Miller

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rule 26(B)(4) Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure: Discovery Of Expert Information, James L. Hayes, Paul T. Ryder Jr.

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mandatory And Permissive Presumptions In Criminal Cases: The Morass Created By Allen, Shari L. Jacobson

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Admissibility Of Expert Witness Testimony: Time To Take The Final Leap?, Maury R. Olicker

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Hot Air In The Redwoods, A Sequel To The Wind In The Willows, William Twining

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Hot Air in the Redwoods by Kenneth Graham, Jr.

The Impeachment Exception To Rule 407: Limitations On The Introduction Of Evidence Of Subsequent Measures, Robert K. Harris

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Uncharged Misconduct Under Rule 404(B): The Admissibility Of Inextricably Intertwined Evidence, Jennifer Y. Schuster

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Admissibility Of Expert Psychological Testimony In Cases Involving The Sexual Misuse Of A Child, Dirk Lorentzen

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Admissibility Of Expert Testimony On Interracial Conflict In New York State Self-Defense Cases, Jay Lippman

In the Public Interest

No abstract provided.

Rock V. Arkansas, Stevan D. Mitchell

Florida State University Law Review

Evidence/Constitutional Law-THE ADMISSIBILITY OF POSTHYPNOTIC TESTIMONY: CONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS AND THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO TESTIFY

Growing Disenchantment With Hypnotic Means Of Refreshing Witness Recall, Michael J. Beaudine

Vanderbilt Law Review

Society has developed several uses for the psychological phenomenon known as hypnosis.' These uses, mostly medical in nature, include substituting for anesthesia and treating pain, anxiety, phobias, and allergies. Not surprisingly, some professional athletes have turned to hypnosis for better success on the playing field. While the scientific and medical communities generally have accepted these uses, controversy has arisen over the use of hypnosis in legal proceedings to refresh the memory of a witness who testifies later in court. The use of hypnosis for investigating crimes began in the early 1970s when law enforcement agencies and police departments formed the …

Prejudice, Politics, And Proof, Peter Tillers

Michigan Law Review

In the last fifteen years there has been a great resurgence of interest in fundamental theoretical analysis of the nature of factual proof in litigation. Many serious scholars, both in the law school world and outside it, have turned their energies in this direction. William L. Twining, Quain Professor of Jurisprudence at University College London, has been a major figure in this growing movement. He recently published a painstaking and scholarly study of Bentham's and Wigmore's theories of evidence, inference, and proof in adjudication. This book is part of Twining's broader, long-term effort to develop a general theoretical framework for …

Proof Of Physical Child Abuse, John E.B. Myers, Linda Carter

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

The Doctrine Of Inevitable Discovery: A Plea For Reasonable Limitations, Steven P. Grossman

All Faculty Scholarship

In reinstating the Iowa murder conviction of Robert Williams, the Supreme Court accepted explicitly for the first time the doctrine of inevitable discovery. Applied for some time by state and federal courts, the doctrine of inevitable discovery is a means by which evidence obtained illegally can still be admitted against defendants in criminal cases. Unfortunately, the Court chose to adopt the doctrine without any of the safeguards necessary to insure that the deterrent impact of the exclusionary rule would be preserved, and in a form that is subject to and almost invites abuse.

This article warns of the danger to …

Evidence, Leonard L. Cavise Prof., Bradley J. Martin

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

International Discovery After Aerospatiale: The Quest For An Analytical Framework, David J. Gerber

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Rape Shield Laws--Is It Time For Reinforcement?, Catherine L. Kello

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note takes a critical look at civil suits arising from allegations of rape, particularly from the perspective of how these actions run counter to the spirit of rape reform and rape shield legislation. The analysis begins with a brief history of the Rape Shield Law and its intended purposes. Part II then utilizes two cases to outline the current dilemma posed by civil suits that are filed during a pending criminal sexual conduct prosecution. After presenting these cases, Part III considers whether a legislative remedy is required and determines that it is. Part IV then proposes a Model Statute. …

What Is Bayesianism? A Guide For The Perplexed, David H. Kaye

Journal Articles

Bayes' Theorem, Bayesian statistics and Bayesian inference have been the subject of sharp dispute in various writings about legal rules of evidence and proof. This article disentangles the many meanings of "Bayesianism." It sketches several competing interpretations of probability, some leading schools of statistical inference, and the elements of Bayesian decision theory. In the process, it notes the aspects of Bayesian theory that have been applied in studies of forensic proof.

Plemel As A Primer On Proving Paternity, David H. Kaye

Journal Articles

Although in the past courts only permitted genetic evidence in paternity suits to prove that an accused man was not the father, with the advent of new genetic tests, which easily can exclude ninety to nitey-five percent of the population in most cases, the supreme courts of Massachusetts, Oregon, and Utah have held that various genetic tests may be used to prove paternity. While a positive move, the admissibility of genetic proof of paternity raises serious questions as to the manner in which this evidence should be presented in court. In the interests of efficiency, some jurisdictions seem to dispense …

The Unsolved Problem In Taking Evidence Abroad: The Non-Rule Of Aerospatiale, William L. Wilks, Nancy E. Goldberg

Penn State International Law Review

In the Aerospatiale decision, the United States Supreme Court attempts to define the powers of American courts to compel discovery from foreign litigants in those courts, in light of the Hague Evidence Convention. This article initially examines the various interpretations of the Convention used to solve the "apples/oranges" problem, encountered by litigants from different nations and incompatible jurisprudential systems, when they seek to obtain evidence located outside the U.S. or in the control of a foreign litigant. The Court's response to this problem is later addressed by an analysis of its decision, which seems to confuse the situation further, for …

Proving The Defendant's Bad Character, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The classic study of the American jury shows that when a defendant's criminal record is known and the prosecution's case has weaknesses, the defendant's chances of acquittal are thirty-eight percent, compared to sixty-five percent otherwise. Because of the danger that jurors will assume that the defendant is guilty based on proof that his bad character predisposes him to an act of crime, the courts and legislatures have attempted to circumscribe the use of such evidence. Some prosecutors, however, although well aware of the insidious effect such prejudicial evidence can have on jurors, violate the rules of evidence, as well as …

Discovery In Complex Litigation: The Dilemma Faced By The Judiciary, Brian Havey

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.