Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (10)
- University of Michigan Law School (8)
- Cornell University Law School (5)
- Selected Works (5)
- Mercer University School of Law (4)
-
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law (3)
- University of Kentucky (3)
- University of Washington School of Law (3)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (3)
- Cleveland State University (2)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (2)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (2)
- UC Law SF (2)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (2)
- University of Baltimore Law (2)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (2)
- Brigham Young University Law School (1)
- Chapman University Dale E. Fowler School of Law (1)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- Penn State Law (1)
- SelectedWorks (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of Missouri School of Law (1)
- University of Richmond (1)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (1)
- Wayne State University (1)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- Scientific evidence (16)
- Evidence (11)
- Expert witnesses (8)
- Admissibility (5)
- Hearsay (5)
-
- Witnesses (5)
- Court (3)
- Cross-examination (3)
- Economics (3)
- Empirical legal studies (3)
- Expert (3)
- Expert testimony (3)
- Frye v. United States (3)
- Litigation (3)
- Science (3)
- Testimony (3)
- United States Supreme Court (3)
- Antitrust law (2)
- Character evidence (2)
- Civil trials (2)
- Confessions (2)
- Confrontation Clause (2)
- Custodial interrogations (2)
- Discovery (2)
- Email (2)
- Expert evidence (2)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (2)
- Jury reforms (2)
- KRE (2)
- Kentucky Rules of Evidence (2)
- Publication
-
- Washington and Lee Law Review (10)
- Articles (6)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (5)
- Faculty Publications (4)
- Mercer Law Review (4)
-
- Faculty Scholarship (3)
- Washington Law Review (3)
- All Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Cleveland State Law Review (2)
- Frank R. Herrmann, S.J. (2)
- Indiana Law Journal (2)
- Law Faculty Scholarly Articles (2)
- Michigan Law Review (2)
- Oklahoma Law Review (2)
- The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process (2)
- Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law (1)
- Dr Matilda Arvidsson (1)
- Journal Articles (1)
- Kentucky Law Journal (1)
- Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (1)
- Louise Harmon (1)
- Michigan Journal of International Law (1)
- Scholarly Works (1)
- Susanna K. Ripken (1)
- Thomas D. Lyon (1)
- Touro Law Review (1)
- Trisha Olson (1)
- University of Miami Law Review (1)
- Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 60 of 69
Full-Text Articles in Law
Newly Available, Not Newly Discovered, Penny J. White
Newly Available, Not Newly Discovered, Penny J. White
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
Advances in science have made it possible to discover new evidence. This newly discovered evidence is not always admissible as evidence. This essay suggests methods by which appellate courts may approach a balance between the rigid application of limitation periods in serious criminal cases and admitting evidence that proves innocence.
The Response To Brecheen V. Reynolds: Oklahoma’S System For Evaluating Extra-Record Constitutional Claims In Death Penalty Cased, Jeremy B. Lowrey
The Response To Brecheen V. Reynolds: Oklahoma’S System For Evaluating Extra-Record Constitutional Claims In Death Penalty Cased, Jeremy B. Lowrey
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
This article attempts to define the “abuse of discretion” standard of review. The article begins by distinguishing the three types of appellate review. It then focuses on review of discretion. Articles written by Professors Maurice Rosenburg, Robert C. Post, and Judge Henery J. Friendly are next analyzed in order to further evaluate judicial discretionary decisionmaking. Caselaw is next used to discuss how courts have attempted to define and apply the abuse of discretion standard. Primary cases considered include Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Pierce v. Underwood, Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., and Koon v. United States. Finally, …
Evidence: 1998-1999 Survey Of New York Law, Faust Rossi
Evidence: 1998-1999 Survey Of New York Law, Faust Rossi
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The Heuristics Of Intellectual Due Process: A Primer For Triers Of Science, Erica Beecher-Monas
The Heuristics Of Intellectual Due Process: A Primer For Triers Of Science, Erica Beecher-Monas
Law Faculty Research Publications
Scientific evidence is an inescapable facet of modern litigation. The Supreme Court; beginning with the seminal case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and continuing with General Electric Co. v. Joiner and Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, has instructed federal judges to evaluate the scientific validity of such evidence in determining the evidence's adinissibiliV. In this Article, Professor Erica Beecher-Monas argues that many judges ignore the science component of their "gatekeeping" duties, focusing instead on rules of convenience that have little scientific justification. As a result, size demonstrates that judges reject even scientifically uncontroversial evidence that would have litttlroeu …
Characteristics Of Soulless Persons: The Applicability Of The Character Evidence Rule To Corporations, Susanna Ripken
Characteristics Of Soulless Persons: The Applicability Of The Character Evidence Rule To Corporations, Susanna Ripken
Susanna K. Ripken
The article discusses the nature of corporate personhood and the propriety of using certain types of evidence to prove corporate misconduct. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404, the character evidence rule, evidence of a person's bad character generally is not admissible to prove that a person acted in conformity with that character on a particular occasion. Although the rule serves to protect individuals in both criminal and civil cases, no consensus exists as to whether the character evidence rule should apply with equal force to corporations. This article argues that the ban on character evidence should not be extended to …
Of Enchantment: The Passing Of The Ordeals And The Rise Of The Jury Trial, Trisha Olson
Of Enchantment: The Passing Of The Ordeals And The Rise Of The Jury Trial, Trisha Olson
Trisha Olson
No abstract provided.
How Good Is Good Enough?: Expert Evidence Under Daubert And Kuhmo, David H. Kaye, David L. Faigman, Michael J. Saks, Joseph Sanders
How Good Is Good Enough?: Expert Evidence Under Daubert And Kuhmo, David H. Kaye, David L. Faigman, Michael J. Saks, Joseph Sanders
Journal Articles
This essay is a response to Professor Edward Imwinkelried's article, "Should the Courts Incorporate a Best Evidence Rule into the Standard Determining the Admissibility of Scientific Testimony?: Enough is Enough When it is not the Best." The authors have two basic points. First, the authors wish to make it clear that they never proposed the "best evidence rule" that he so vigorously attacks, and they think his suggestion that they did so is strained. Second, they wish to reiterate that courts sometimes should do more than they have to ensure that expert testimony is reasonably sound. The important debate underway …
Balancing Hearsay And Criminal Discovery, John G. Douglass
Balancing Hearsay And Criminal Discovery, John G. Douglass
Law Faculty Publications
and prosecutors. Part I of this Article argues that the conventional theory of hearsaydiscovery balance does not reflect the reality of modem federal practice. An imbalance has arisen because, in the last quarter century, developments in the law of evidence and confrontation are at odds with developments-or one might say nondevelopments-in the law of criminal discovery. Since enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence in 1975, both the law of evidence and modem Confrontation Clause doctrine have evolved toward broader admission of hearsay in criminal cases. Contrary to conventional theory, that evolution has at least matched-and probably has outpaced-the trend …
Insurance-Weight Of Evidence-Construction Of Policy-Proximate Cause
Insurance-Weight Of Evidence-Construction Of Policy-Proximate Cause
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Kumho Tire Co. V. Carmichael: The Supreme Court Follows Up On The Daubert Test, Martin A. Schwartz
Kumho Tire Co. V. Carmichael: The Supreme Court Follows Up On The Daubert Test, Martin A. Schwartz
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Doubts About Daubert: Psychiatric Anecdata As A Case Study, Christopher Slobogin
Doubts About Daubert: Psychiatric Anecdata As A Case Study, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., the Supreme Court sensibly held that testimony purporting to be scientific is admissible only if it possesses sufficient indicia of scientific validity. In Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, the Court more questionably held that opinion evidence based on "technical" and "specialized" knowledge must meet the same admissibility threshold as scientific testimony. This Article addresses the implications of these two decisions for opinion evidence presented by mental health professionals in criminal trials.
The Limits Of Privilege: The Developing Scope Of Federal Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege Law, Melissa Lee Nelken
The Limits Of Privilege: The Developing Scope Of Federal Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege Law, Melissa Lee Nelken
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Expert Qualifications: Traps For The Unwary, Paul C. Giannelli
Expert Qualifications: Traps For The Unwary, Paul C. Giannelli
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Sender Beware: The Discoverability And Admissibility Of E-Mail, William Decoste
Sender Beware: The Discoverability And Admissibility Of E-Mail, William Decoste
Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law
This Note will explore the current body of jurisprudence concerning the discoverability and admissibility of e-mail in both the civil and criminal contexts. Beginning with a brief explanation of the relevant forms of information technology and electronic communication, it will examine the common misconceptions that fuel the ongoing imprudent use of e-mail. It will then trace the development of the case law, from the foundational cases that first confronted electronic evidence to recent precedent specifically addressing the various forms of contemporary e-mail. Federal statutory law regulating the acquisition and use of electronic communications will also be discussed. This Note will …
Allocating Discovery Costs In The Computer Age: Deciding Who Should Bear The Costs Of Discovery Of Electronically Stored Data, Corinne L. Giacobbe
Allocating Discovery Costs In The Computer Age: Deciding Who Should Bear The Costs Of Discovery Of Electronically Stored Data, Corinne L. Giacobbe
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Kumho Tire Co. V. Carmichael: The Supreme Court Follows Up On The Daubert Test, Martin A. Schwartz
Kumho Tire Co. V. Carmichael: The Supreme Court Follows Up On The Daubert Test, Martin A. Schwartz
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
When Science Is Too Daunting: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Federal Courts, And The Struggling Spirit Of Daubert, Carl H. Johnson
When Science Is Too Daunting: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Federal Courts, And The Struggling Spirit Of Daubert, Carl H. Johnson
Villanova Environmental Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Time For Final Action On 18 U.S.C. § 3292, Abraham Abramovsky, Jonathan I. Edelstein
Time For Final Action On 18 U.S.C. § 3292, Abraham Abramovsky, Jonathan I. Edelstein
Michigan Journal of International Law
18 U.S.C. § 3292 was enacted in order to meet a compelling prosecutorial need-the increasing necessity of obtaining evidence from abroad via procedures which are frequently time-consuming. However, the statute contains numerous ambiguities, as well as built-in disadvantages both to prosecutors and defendants, which diminish its value as a prosecutorial evidence-gathering device while increasing the possibility that defendants' rights and expectations will be violated. However, it is possible to interpret the statute in a manner which is consistent with its terms and purpose and which concomitantly preserves the rights of the Government and of grand jury targets.
Prejudice To The NTh Degree: The Introduction Of Uncharged Misconduct Admissible Only Against A Co-Defendant At A Megatrial, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Prejudice To The NTh Degree: The Introduction Of Uncharged Misconduct Admissible Only Against A Co-Defendant At A Megatrial, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Federal Rules Of Evidence: Raising The Bar On Adminissibility Of Expert Testimony: Can Your Expert Make The Grade After Kumho Tire V. Carmichael, Douglas B. Maddock Jr.
Federal Rules Of Evidence: Raising The Bar On Adminissibility Of Expert Testimony: Can Your Expert Make The Grade After Kumho Tire V. Carmichael, Douglas B. Maddock Jr.
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Here Today, Gone Tomorrow - Three Common Mistakes Courts Make When Police Lose Or Destroy Evidence With Apparent Exculpatory, Elizabeth A. Bawden
Here Today, Gone Tomorrow - Three Common Mistakes Courts Make When Police Lose Or Destroy Evidence With Apparent Exculpatory, Elizabeth A. Bawden
Cleveland State Law Review
Part I of this Article examines the first question, what does it mean for evidence to have "apparent exculpatory value?" Part II of this Article answers the second question, when does Youngblood's bad faith requirement apply in failure to preserve evidence cases? Part III then seeks to determine the substance of Youngblood's bad faith requirement and identify the best approach to defining it. Ultimately, this Article argues that there are three common mistakes that courts make when applying Trombetta and Youngblood.
A Presumption Of Innocence, Not Of Even Odds, Richard D. Friedman
A Presumption Of Innocence, Not Of Even Odds, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Now I know how the Munchkins felt. Here I have been, toiling in the fields of Evidenceland for some years, laboring along with others to show how use of Bayesian probability theory can assist in the analysis and understanding of evidentiary problems.' In doing so, we have had to wage continuous battle against the Bayesioskeptics-the wicked witches who deny much value, even heuristic value, for probability theory in evidentiary analysis.2 Occasionally, I have longed for law-and-economics scholars to help work this field, which should be fertile ground for them.3 So imagine my delight when the virtual personification of law and …
Are Prosecutorial Ethics Standards Different?, Kevin C. Mcmunigal
Are Prosecutorial Ethics Standards Different?, Kevin C. Mcmunigal
Faculty Publications
Once a prosecutor determines to employ an expert, a number of distinct decisions must be confronted-from choosing the expert, to complying with discovery obligations, to presenting the testimony at trial. Part I of this essay considers the selection of experts. Although improper selection of experts can be viewed as merely another aspect of presenting misleading testimony, we treat it separately in this essay because the literature typically ignores it. Part 1I examines the pretrial disclosure of scientific evidence. The issues that have arisen in this context include late disclosure, omitting information from laboratory reports, declining to have a report prepared, …
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.
The Confrontation Clause: Statements Against Penal Interest As A Firmly Rooted Hearsay Exception, Amy N. Loth
The Confrontation Clause: Statements Against Penal Interest As A Firmly Rooted Hearsay Exception, Amy N. Loth
Cleveland State Law Review
This Article will explore why these types of confessions, called self-inculpatory statements, should be admissible under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. Part IIA of this Article will discuss the two-part test set forth in Ohio v. Roberts. Part IIB will address Lilly v. Virginia, the Supreme Court's first attempt to resolve whether statements against penal interest are sufficiently reliable to be admissible under the Confrontation Clause. Part IIB will also explore the distinction between self-inculpatory and non-self-inculpatory statements, what constitutes a "firmnly rooted" hearsay exception, and also the policy concerns behind creating a "firmly rooted" hearsay exception. Part …
New Developments In Scientific Evidence, Paul C. Giannelli
New Developments In Scientific Evidence, Paul C. Giannelli
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Congress' Arrogance, Yale Kamisar
Congress' Arrogance, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Does Dickerson v. U.S., reaffirming Miranda and striking down §3501 (the federal statute purporting to "overrule" Miranda), demonstrate judicial arrogance? Or does the legislative history of §3501 demonstrate the arrogance of Congress? Shortly after Dickerson v. U.S. reaffirmed Miranda and invalidated §3501, a number of Supreme Court watchers criticized the Court for its "judicial arrogance" in peremptorily rejecting Congress' test for the admissibility of confessions. The test, pointed out the critics, had been adopted by extensive hearings and debate about Miranda's adverse impact on law enforcement. The Dickerson Court did not discuss the legislative history of §3501 at all. However, …
Evidence Issues In Domestic Violence Civil Cases, Jane C. Murphy, Jane H. Aiken
Evidence Issues In Domestic Violence Civil Cases, Jane C. Murphy, Jane H. Aiken
All Faculty Scholarship
New laws and policies aimed at protecting victims of domestic violence have been adopted across the country over the last twenty years.The legal approaches taken to protect battered women and control family violence have resulted in significant changes in family law. New laws include statutes permitting civil protection or restraining orders, and laws requiring that domestic violence be considered in custody and/or visitation decisions. Both of these types of statutory reforms can provide protection to adult victims of domestic violence and their children. Evaluating a parent's fitness by considering past acts of violence to other family members results in decisions …
Modifying The Kentucky Rules Of Evidence--A Separation Of Powers Issue, Robert G. Lawson
Modifying The Kentucky Rules Of Evidence--A Separation Of Powers Issue, Robert G. Lawson
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Modifying The Kentucky Rules Of Evidence—A Separation Of Powers Issue, Robert G. Lawson
Modifying The Kentucky Rules Of Evidence—A Separation Of Powers Issue, Robert G. Lawson
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
How do you modify laws that simultaneously exist as statutes and rules of court? For reasons that are described elsewhere and need not be repeated here, the Kentucky Rules of Evidence (K.R.E.) came into existence through concurrent enactment by the General Assembly and Kentucky Supreme Court and thus are endowed with all the attributes of both statutes and rules of court. So, how do you change them when the inevitable need to do so arises, a question made both interesting and difficult by the fact that there is no institutional mechanism for concurrent lawmaking by the General Assembly and supreme …