Law Commons^™

Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 2 - Rosetta Stone's Answers To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Summary Of Fields V. State,125 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 36, John F. Burns

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This case is an appeal from the Fourth Judicial District Court judgment of conviction of first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder. The appellant asserts error in admitting prior bad act evidence, error in excluding witness testimony as inadmissible extrinsic evidence, error in admitting telephone conversations subject to martial privilege, error in instructing the jury on specific intent, and improper argument by the prosecutor in closing argument.

Summary Of Fields V. State, 125 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 57, Kimberly Duque

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Whether the district court abused its discretion in admitting prior bad act evidence because (1) it did not fall within the common-plan-or-scheme exception or because (2) its probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.

The Fourth Amendment, The Exclusionary Rule, And The Roberts Court: Normative And Empirical Dimensions Of The Over-Deterrence Hypothesis, Donald Dripps

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This essay engages in the risky business of predicting future Supreme Court developments. In the first part, I analyze the evidence suggesting that the Roberts Court might abolish the exclusionary rule. The critique of exclusion in Hudson v. Michigan is both less and more probative than appears at first blush. Part II turns to some less obvious evidence pointing in the direction of retaining the exclusionary rule. First, abolition of the exclusionary rule is inconsistent with the Hudson majority's apparent content with prevailing police behavior. Second, abolition of the exclusionary rule would curtail the power of the Supreme Court. Part …

Replacing The Exclusionary Rule: Fourth Amendment Violations As Direct Criminal Contempt, Ronald J. Rychlak

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The exclusionary rule, which bars from admission evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures, is a bedrock of American law. It is highly controversial, but there seems to be no equally effective way to protect citizens' rights. This paper proposes that an admissibility standard be adopted that is in keeping with virtually every jurisdiction around the world other than the United States. Thus, before ruling evidence inadmissible, the court would consider the level of the constitutional violation, the seriousness of the crime, whether the violation casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the …

Reliability, Justice And Confessions: The Essential Paradox, Russell L. Weaver

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This paper deals with the issue of "reliability" in the criminal justice process, and the rising number of wrongful convictions that have been identified in recent years. Using modern evidentiary techniques, a rising number of individuals have been found "innocent" of the crimes for which they have been convicted. These instances of wrongful conviction have involved individuals who spent time on death row, awaiting execution, only to be completely exonerated. There are various reasons for these wrongful convictions, including prosecutorial misconduct and systemic failures such as inadequate indigent representation. This paper focuses on another systemic failure: difficulties with the confessions …

Mapp V. Ohio'S Unsung Hero: The Suppression Hearing As Morality Play, Scott E. Sundby

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The exclusionary rule is back under the judicial magnifying glass. Recent opinions, most notably by Justice Scalia, have sparked speculation that the Roberts Court is inclined to overrule Mapp v. Ohio and send Fourth Amendment disputes back to the realm of civil suits and police disciplinary actions. As the Court's rulings have made clear, any reevaluation of the exclusionary rule's future will be conducted under the now familiar rubric of whether the rule's "benefit" of deterring police misbehavior outweighs the "cost" of lost evidence and convictions.

This essay argues that if any such reevaluation does occur, the Court must take …

Melendez-Diaz And The Right To Confrontation, Craig M. Bradley

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court overruled Ohio v. Roberts and adopted new law concerning the use of hearsay testimony at criminal trials. This was based on the Sixth Amendment's command that "In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him .. " On its face this provision seems to say that the accused has the right to cross-examine anybody who testifies for the prosecution at trial, whether as a live witness or through hearsay. The Supreme Court acknowledged much of this in Crawford, but …

Evidence, Marc T. Treadwell

Mercer Law Review

Every Georgia attorney and trial court judge ought to set aside the time to read every Georgia appellate court opinion on the subject of evidence (or, for that matter, any other selected subject) rendered during a given period of a year. The feel that one acquires for the attitude of the appellate courts of Georgia is interesting. Most though, will not have the time for such projects, so that to read someone else's selections and comments may be of some benefit. It will not, however, give the "feel" that one acquires through an individual reading of the cases.

This was …

13. Interviewing Children., Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

Evidence In International Criminal Trials: Lessons And Contributions From The Special Court For Sierra Leone, Patrick Matthew Hassan-Morlai

Patrick Matthew Hassan-Morlai

The general aim of this paper is to contribute to the discourse on the development of a system of international criminal justice. In so doing, this paper will pay attention to one aspect – rules of evidence – and examine its role in ensuring the rights to fair trial. The examination is limited to discussing offences relating to the jurisdiction ratione materiae of the SCSL contained in Articles 2-5 of the SCSL Statute.

Civil Practice And Procedure, Hon. Jane Marum Roush

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law And Procedure, Michael T. Judge, Stephen R. Mccullough

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

12. Disclosure Of Child Sexual Abuse., Thomas D. Lyon, Elizabeth C. Ahern

Thomas D. Lyon

Book Review: Carl Cranor, Toxic Torts: Science, Law, And The Possibility Of Justice, David S. Caudill

Working Paper Series

Carl F. Cranor’s Toxic Torts: Science, Law, and the Possibility of Justice is a sustained, comprehensive argument that the Daubert gatekeeping regime has tilted the playing field against injured plaintiffs in toxic tort litigation. More generally, Cranor joins those who argue that the Daubert regime has not fared well in practice. Complex scientific evidence is not handled well in trials because scientific methods, data, and inferential reasoning are not well understood by gatekeeping judges. Cranor’s goal is to help solve this problem by offering a detailed description of the patterns of reasoning, evidence collection, and inference in nonlegal scientific settings. …

Repeating, Yet Evading Review: Admitting Reliable Expert Testimony In Criminal Cases Still Depends Upon Who Is Asking, Wes R. Porter

Publications

A trial court must find that the proponent of expert witness testimony has set forth adequate evidence that the testimony is based upon reliable methods and will be helpful to the trier of fact. Much has been written regarding the reliability prong since the Supreme Court’s decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., yet a severe prejudice to the criminally accused persists today in some trial courts’ analyses of the often overlooked helpfulness prong. Despite the straight-forward articulation of helpfulness, described as “fit” or mere relevance, some trial courts apply the helpfulness prong differently depending upon whether the expert testimony …

We Have A "Purpose" Requirement If We Can Keep It, James F. Flanagan

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court in Giles v. California held that a defendant forfeits the right to confront a witness only when he purposefully keeps the witness away. Many see the "purpose" requirement as an unjustified bar to the use of victim hearsay, particularly in domestic violence prosecutions where victims often refuse to appear. The author defends Giles as a correct reading of history, and independently justified by longstanding precedent that constitutional trial rights can only be lost by intentional manipulation of the judicial process. Moreover, the purpose requirement does not prevent prosecutions or convictions because the definition of testimonial hearsay is …

Admissibility Of Scientific Evidence And Expert Testimony: One Potato, Two Potato, Daubert, Frye, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This handout from a Maryland Judicial Institute presentation covers the Maryland Rules concerning expert testimony and the ways they differ from the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Summary Of Sonia F. Ex Rel. J.M. V. Dist. Ct., 125 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 38, Jason Vanmeetren

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Nevada’s rape shield law2 applies only to criminal proceedings and not civil cases. However, the district court may limit the discovery of an alleged victim’s sexual history to protect the victim’s privacy.

The Sixth Amendment And Expert Witnesses In Criminal Tax Cases, Steve R. Johnson

Scholarly Publications

Recently, in the Baxter case, a federal district court vacated the sentence imposed as a result of a guilty plea in a criminal tax case. The court held that the failure of defense counsel to retain the services of an expert in tax crimes sentencing violated the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to effective representation.

This installment of the Tax Crimes column explores Baxter. Part A briefly notes the civil and criminal tax contexts in which tax experts are used. Part B describes Baxter and its holding. Part C asks whether defense counsel in criminal tax cases should always retain a …

Out-Of-Court Statements: The Concentric Hoops Of The Hearsay Rule And The Confrontation Clause, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This 44 page booklet created for the Maryland Judicial Institute outlines hearsay evidence, how hearsay overlaps with the Confrontation Clause, and the exceptions to hearsay under Maryland law.

The Legality And Practicality Of Remote Witness Testimony, Fredric Lederer

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Court Ordered Disclosure Of Historical Cell Site Location Information: The Argument For A Probable Cause Standard, Patrick T. Chamberlain

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Tattoos Of Girls Under Pimp Control & Pimp Rules For The Control Of Victims, Donna M. Hughes Dr.

Donna M. Hughes

Probability, Policy And The Problem Of Reference Class, Robert J. Rhee

Robert Rhee

This short paper focuses on the problem of reference class in evidentiary assessment as it relates to probability and weight of evidence. The reluctance to inject mathematical formalism into the factfinding function is justified. Objective probability requires a reference class from which a proportion is derived. Probability assessments change with the reference class. If a proposition is subject to proportional comparison against two or more different references, their selection is often an inductive process. The advantage of objectivity and methodological rigor is illusory. A legal dispute is the search for a plausible understanding of the truth, and an overtly mathematized …

Managing The Unmanageable: A Brief Accounting Of A Special Master’S Thirty Years Of Experience In Complex Litigation, Paul Rice

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

Managing an efficient, but fair, pretrial process in a large and complex case has always been a challenge. With the advent of electronic communications and the corresponding explosion of privilege claims, this challenge has become significantly more difficult. Indeed, it is not uncommon for corporate parties to assert tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of privilege claims. Furthermore, the resolution of these privilege questions is often compounded by difficult choice of law questions that can have the result of different substantive principles being applied to identical discovery demands originating in different jurisdictions. Additionally, before addressing the increasingly voluminous …

The Dna Of An Argument: A Case Study In Legal Logos, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article develops a framework for analyzing legal argument through an in-depth case study of the debate over federal actions for post-conviction DNA access. Building on the Aristotelian concept of logos, this Article maintains that the persuasive power of legal logic depends in part on the rhetorical characteristics of premises, inferences, and conclusions in legal proofs. After sketching a taxonomy that distinguishes between prototypical argument logo (formal, empirical, narrative, and categorical), the Article applies its framework to parse the rhetorical dynamics at play in litigation over post-conviction access to DNA evidence under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, focusing in particular on …

Executing Capital Punishment Via Case Study: A Socratic Chat About New Jersey's Abolition Of The Death Penalty And Convincing Other States To Follow Suit, James Johnston

James B Johnston

For those who detest capital punishment Christmas arrived early in 1997. On December 17, 2007 New Jersey became the first State to abolish the death penalty via enactments from both the executive and legislative branches of government. The responses both domestically and abroad have been overwhelmingly supportive. New Jersey was able to do so thanks to the work of the New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission; a blue ribbon panel of individuals appointed by Governor Corzine to study capital punishment and provide their findings to the State Legislature and the Governor. The commission recommended the death penalty be abolished and …

Arsenic And Old Chemistry: Images Of Mad Alchemists, Experts Attacking Experts, And The Crisis In Forensic Science, David S. Caudill

Working Paper Series

Drawing on research into the use of experts in early 19th-century criminal trials, the image of mad alchemists in popular culture representations of science, and the distinction between empirical and contingent “interpretive repertoires” in the discourse of scientific controversies, this article explores the controversy over arsenic-detection technologies prior to the Marsh test. In addition to noting the predictable criticism of incompetent expertise in the service of law, this article highlights implied accusations of hubris and amorality on the part of over-confident experts, both in the early 19th-century and in today's crisis of forensic science.

"An Opportunity For Effective Cross-Examination": Limits On The Confrontation Right Of The Pro Se Defendant, Alanna Clair

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The rights of a defendant to confront his accusers and conduct his defense without the assistance of counsel are sacrosanct in the American judicial system. The rights of the defendant are even sometimes exalted at the expense of the rights of the public or of victims of crime. This Note examines the problem of a pro se defendant using his confrontation right to intimidate or harass his alleged victims testifying against him. It is well-established that the confrontation right is not unconditional. The problem comes in determining whether the courts can place limits on the confrontation right of a pro …