Law Commons^™

Admissibility Of Scientific Evidence Under Daubert: The Fatal Flaws Of ‘Falsifiability’ And ‘Falsification’, Barbara P. Billauer Esq

barbara p billauer esq

Abstract: The Daubert mantra demands that judges, acting as gatekeepers, prevent para, pseudo or ‘bad’ science from infiltrating the courtroom. To do so, the Judges must first determine what “science” is? And then, what ‘good science’ is? It is submitted that Daubert is seriously polluted with the notions of Karl Popper who sets ‘falsifiability’ and ‘falsification’ as the demarcation line for that determination. This inapt philosophy has intractably infected case law, leading to bad decisions immortalized as stare decisis. Among other problems, is the intolerance of Popper’s system for multiple causation, a key component of toxic- torts. Thus, the primary …

Daubert Debunked: A History Of Legal Retrogression A History Of Legal Retrogression And The Need To Reassess ‘Scientific Admissibility’, Barbara P. Billauer Esq

barbara p billauer esq

Abstract: With ‘novel’ scientific discoveries accelerating at an unrelenting pace, the need for accessible and implementable standards for evaluating the legal admissibility of scientific evidence becomes more and more crucial. As science changes, legal standards for evaluating ‘novel’ science must be plastic enough to respond to fast-moving changes. This, ostensibly, was the Daubert objective. Since it was decided in 1993, however, Daubert’s impact has been hotly contested -- with plaintiffs and defendants each claiming the decision unfairly favors the other side. New approaches are constantly suggested to deal with the perceived impact, although there is no uniform consensus of exactly …

Implementing The Lessons From Wrongful Convictions: An Empirical Analysis Of Eyewitness Identification Reform Strategies, Keith A. Findley

Keith A Findley

Learning about the flaws in the criminal justice system that have produced wrongful convictions has progressed at a dramatic pace since the first innocent individuals were exonerated by postconviction DNA testing in 1989. Application of that knowledge to improving the criminal justice system, however, has lagged far behind the growth in knowledge. Likewise, while considerable scholarship has been devoted to identifying the factors that produce wrongful convictions, very little scholarly attention has been devoted to the processes through which knowledge about causes is translated into reforms.

Using eyewitness misidentification—one of the leading contributors to wrongful convictions and the most thoroughly …

Visualizing Dna Proof, Nicholas L. Georgakopoulos

Nicholas L Georgakopoulos

DNA proof inherently involves the use of probability theory, which is often counterintuitive. Visual depictions of probability theory, however, can clarify the analysis and make it tractable. A DNA hit from a large database is a notoriously difficult probabi­li­ty theory issue, yet the visuals should enable courts and juries to handle it. The Puckett facts are an example of a general approach: A search in a large DNA database produces a hit for a cold crime from 1972 San Francisco. Probability theory allows us to process the probabilities that someone else in the database, someone not in the database, or …

Dumping Daubert, Popping Popper And Falsifying Falsifiability: A Re-Assessment Of First Principles, Barbara P. Billauer Esq

barbara p billauer esq

Abstract: The Daubert mantra demands that judges, acting as gatekeepers, prevent para, pseudo or bad science from infiltrating the courtroom. To do so, the Judges must first determine what is ‘science’ and what is ‘good science.’ It is submitted that Daubert is deeply polluted with the notions of Karl Popper who sets ‘falsifiability’ and ‘falsification’ as the demarcation line for that determination. This philosophy has intractably infected case law, leading to bad decisions immortalized as stare decisis, and an unworkable system of decision-making, which negatively impacts litigant expectations. Among other problems is the intolerance of Popper’s system for multiple causation, …

Please Provide The Entire Electronic Medical Record, Jonathan H. Lomurro Esq. Llm

Jonathan H. Lomurro Esq. LLM

No abstract provided.

Gay Panic And The Case For Gay Shield Laws, Kelly Strader, Molly Selvin, Lindsey Hay

Kelly Strader

In a highly publicized “gay panic” case, Brandon McInerney shot and killed Larry King in their middle school classroom. King was a self-identified gay student who sometimes wore jewelry and makeup to school and, according to those who knew him, was possibly transgender. Tried as an adult for first-degree murder, McInerney asserted a heat of passion defense based upon King’s alleged sexual advances. The jury deadlocked, with a majority accepting McInerney’s defense. Drawing largely upon qualitative empirical research, this article uses the Larry King murder case as a prism though which to view the doctrinal, theoretical, and policy bases of …

Discretion Abused: Reinterpreting The Appellate Standard Of Review For Hearsay, Matthew J. Peterson

Matthew J. Peterson

Matthew J. Peterson, Discretion Abused: Reinterpreting the Appellate Standard of Review for Hearsay

Abstract:

The decision by a federal a court to exclude or admit hearsay can be crucial to the case of either party. Despite this prospective impact, the federal courts of appeal currently defer to district courts’ expertise by reviewing a district court’s decision to admit or exclude hearsay for an abuse of discretion. Such deference often insulates district courts’ incorrect interpretation of the rule against hearsay and the improper application of the exclusions and exceptions to the rule from appellate reversal.

Lowering the standard of review for …

Evidence And The Pursuit Of Truth In The Law, Jeffery L. Johnson

Jeffery L Johnson

Lawyers should be much more concerned with the concepts of truth and evidence. The entire profession depends on truth. It is what police detectives, District Attorneys, juries, trial judges, appellate judges, and academic lawyers offering interpretive theories, are all concerned with. But, since truth is seldom apparent on its sleeve, these legal actors are equally dependent on evidence as the only(?) reliable(?) means of determining truth. I defend a commonsensical theory of [good] evidence. I argue that this view, inference to the best explanation, captures most, if not all, of a lawyer’s appeal to evidence. It is far from clear, …

Rationality, Insanity, And The Insanity Defense: Reflections On The Limits Of Reason, Theodore Y. Blumoff

Theodore Y. Blumoff

Individuals who suffer from chronic paranoid ideations live with deeply embedded conspiratorial delusions that are sometimes accompanied by unwanted visual and/or auditory stimuli, sometime neither: just psychotic delusions in which they feel as if they have lost control of their lives – and of course they have, albeit not from the performances of foreign forces. When those perceived forces persevere for even a fairly short period of time, they can dictate the performance of evil deeds that the individual ultimately feels helpless to oppose. What observations and findings from neuroscience make clear is that such individuals do not lack knowledge, …

Finding The Foregone Conclusions Of Encryption, Timothy A. Wiseman

Timothy A Wiseman

Encryption is commonly used to protect private information, for both legitimate and illegitimate reasons. Courts have been struggling to determine when, within the bounds of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, the Courts may compel a defendant in a criminal case to decrypt their data.

This article argues that a broad use of the Forgone Conclusion doctrine would permit the Courts to order a defendant to decrypt their data when the prosecution can show with reasonable particularity the existence and location of the encrypted documents, that they are likely to be incriminating, and that the government can authenticate them without the …

Back To The Future: The Constitution Requires Reasonableness And Particularity—Introducing The “Seize But Don’T Search” Doctrine, Adam Lamparello, Charles E. Maclean

Adam Lamparello

Issuing one-hundred or fewer opinions per year, the United States Supreme Court cannot keep pace with opinions that match technological advancement. As a result, in Riley v. California and United States v. Wurie, the Court needs to announce a broader principle that protects privacy in the digital age. That principle, what we call “seize but don’t search,” recognizes that the constitutional touchstone for all searches is reasonableness.

When do present-day circumstances—the evolution in the Government’s surveillance capabilities, citizens’ phone habits, and the relationship between the NSA and telecom companies—become so thoroughly unlike those considered by the Supreme Court thirty-four years …

Civil Litigation In Spain: How To Practice Evidence In Civil Procedure, Elena Martinez

Elena Martinez

Evidence Law and Practice is the key to succeed on a civil procedure. It is possible to have some rights, but if they cannot be proved the desired legal consequences will not be obtained and the proceedings will not finish in a satisfactory manner. In this article we will explain that civil procedure evidence is governed by the dispositive principle and all the principles arising out of it. The rights disputed in civil procedure are private rights, that is, available to the parties. In this regard the parties are entitled to take action and therefore bring a claim, which means …

Crawford, Confrontation And Mental States, Kevin C. Mcmunigal

Kevin C. McMunigal

This essay seeks to explain and help remedy the confusion generated by Crawford v. Washington, the landmark Supreme Court confrontation clause case. Many have taken the Crawford line of cases, the most recent of which came down this past June, to task for lack of clarity and coherence. My thesis is that the primary source of the Crawford cases’ ambiguity is their poor handling of four key mental state questions. I argue that clearer treatment of these is the way out of the current morass. I use criminal law’s treatment of mental state as a foil against which to compare …

Timeless Trial Strategies And Tactics: Lessons From The Classic Claus Von Bülow Case, Daniel M. Braun

Daniel M Braun

In this new Millennium -- an era of increasingly complex cases -- it is critical that lawyers keep a keen eye on trial strategy and tactics. Although scientific evidence today is more sophisticated than ever, the art of effectively engaging people and personalities remains prime. Scientific data must be contextualized and presented in absorbable ways, and attorneys need to ensure not only that they correctly understand jurors, judges, witnesses, and accused persons, but also that they find the means to make their arguments truly resonate if they are to formulate an effective case and ultimately realize justice. A decades-old case …

The System Of Modern Criminal Conspiracy, Steven R. Morrison

Steven R Morrison

Something has changed in the modern system of American criminal conspiracy law compared to its prior iterations. This article explores that change, arguing that the system of modern criminal conspiracy now gives to the government such great discretion to charge and prove a conspiracy that unpopular ideas and the speech that expresses them have become ready subjects of prosecution. At its center, this article defines the system of modern conspiracy law, which is one of uniformity rather than dynamism. Where dynamic systems of law contain distinct components that perform different tasks (proving actus reus and mens rea, for example), the …

No Remedy For This Wrong? Analyzing The Appropriate Remedy For Violations Of California Penal Code § 834c, Jared W. Olen

Jared W. Olen

Article 36(1)(b) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations provides that a foreign national of a state-party has the right to have her consulate notified of her arrest upon detention. Many United Supreme Court and other federal courts have grappled with issues stemming from that right, including whether the treaty creates privately-enforceable rights. However, California was unique in that it enacted California Penal Code § 834c, which codifies as state law the right to consular notification.

While this codification precludes much discussion about privately-enforceable rights, the statute is, however, silent on what remedy should be applied if law enforcement violate …

Latif V. Obama: The Epistemology Of Intelligence Information And Legal Evidence, Richard O. Morgan

Richard O. Morgan

The process used by the Intelligence Community to collection information concedes a degree of truth-finding efficacy in order to serve other social values and policy considerations. As a result, the use of information derived from the “intelligence cycle” as evidence in judicial proceedings creates conceptual and procedural challenges. For example, the need to quickly and widely disseminate intelligence information across vast geographic spaces results in the Intelligence Community relying heavily on written communication. As a consequence, degrees of uncertainty or reliability may be distilled into written caveats within intelligence reports, with an attendant loss of subtlety. In contrast, judicial trials …

Employee And Inventor Witnesses In Patent Trials: The Blurry Line Between Expert And Lay Testimony, Alex Reese

Alex Reese

Parties in patent lawsuits that are going to trial face a crucial choice: who is the best witness to explain the often complex or scientific technology behind an invention or an accused product? Often, the parties will select an employee witness such as an engineer, scientist, or a named inventor of the patent-in-suit to offer this key testimony rather than a hired expert. Many litigants have found that there are benefits to choosing an employee witness who can testify based on first-hand experience with the technology in question rather than a hired expert, who must prepare an expert report and …

Burdens Of Proof And Qualified Immunity, Kenneth J. Duvall

Kenneth J Duvall

Despite the need to strike a proper balance between effective § 1983 suits to deter government misconduct and corresponding, robust defenses to deter frivolous suits, courts across the nation cannot agree on the fundamental questions of what the proper defenses to § 1983 actions are or how to allocate the burdens of proof in such litigation. This Article would remedy this situation, proposing an approach that offers both a single defense to § 1983 claims and a uniform allocation of the burdens of proof when that defense is raised. In Part I, this Article briefly explains the burdens of proof, …

The Contradictory Stance On Jury Nullification, Kenneth J. Duvall

Kenneth J Duvall

Arguments about jury nullification in both courts and academia proceed under the assumption that either proponents and opponents of nullification could decisively carry the day. But as current Supreme Court law stands, nullification is at once prohibited and protected. This Article shines a light on the uneasy, confusing compromise in the doctrine, and finds that the two ways out of the dilemma—fully embracing nullification, or rejecting it—are equally taboo to the American legal mind. In Part I, this Article briefly explains the contested history of nullification. In Part II, it examines modern courts’ intermittent recognition of nullification. Part III then …

The Troubling Role Of Federal Registration In Proving Intellectual Property Crimes, Susan M. Richey

Susan M Richey

No abstract provided.

The Troubling Role Of Federal Registration In Proving Intellectual Property Crimes, Susan M. Richey

Susan M Richey

No abstract provided.

Legal Applications Of Modern Finance, Matthew E. Cavanaugh Mba Cpa Esq.

Matthew E. Cavanaugh MBA CPA Esq.

While scholars and practitioners have applied economics to law successfully for decades, there has been almost no similar application of modern finance. Courts have used the central concept of classical finance, time value of money, for many years, but their use is still unsophisticated.

This article details two ways to apply modern finance to law. This article first describes a method of improving courts’ time value of money calculations, by using a systematically complete four factor analysis to determine the appropriate discount rate. This article then describes a method of calculating future damages that uses market price of risk, based …

A Turbulent Adolescence Ahead: The Icc’S Insistence On Disclosure In The Lubanga Trial, Christodoulos Kaoutzanis

Christodoulos Kaoutzanis

The completion of the first trial at the International Criminal Court (‘ICC’), against Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, was a great milestone for international criminal justice. Despite this obvious accomplishment, this paper argues that the Trial Chamber’s solutions to two evidentiary problems will restrict the ICC’s potential to effectively hear future cases. First, this paper presents the details behind the two evidentiary problems of disclosure, that of exculpatory confidential information and that of the identities of the Prosecutor’s intermediaries. This analysis is undertaken in an exhaustive manner, in order to highlight the challenges that the Prosecutor faced and the manner in which …

Like A Glass Slipper On Step-Sister, How The One-Ring Rules Them All At Trial, Cathren Page

Cathren Page

The literary concept of an endowed object can weave a thread of narrative continuity throughout a trial and resonates in the mind of the judge or juror. In literature, an endowed object is a material object that reverberates with symbolic significance throughout the story. The object can develop the theme, character, and emotions. Examples include Cinderella’s glass slipper, the one-ring, the handkerchief in Othello, and the mocking jay pin from The Hunger Games. Endowed objects have been persuasive symbols in famous trials as well. Endowed objects include the glove in the O.J. Simpson murder trial and John Wilkes Booth’s boot …

Admissibility Of Dna Evidence: Italy Under Attack, Adina Rosenfeld

Adina Rosenfeld

The purpose of this paper is to compare the differences and similarities in the evidentiary rules for DNA in Italy and in the United States in the light of their two different legal traditions. This note will compare American and Italian rules of evidence and procedure for the admissibility of DNA in criminal trials and analyze the most relevant differences between the two systems. Based on this comparison, the note will argue that Amanda Knox would not have been convicted of murdering her roommate in American lower court because the DNA evidence would not have been admissible. In Italy, Knox …

The Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege As An “Occasional Instrument Of Injustice”: An Argument For A Criminal Threat Exception, Joi T. Montiel

Joi T Montiel

The Supreme Court in Jaffee v. Redmond announced a federal testimonial privilege protecting communications between a psychotherapist and his patient in federal court. However, in footnote 19 of the opinion, the Court noted that there may be times where the privilege must “give way,” such as when “disclosure” of the statements made in therapy is necessary to protect an intended victim of the patient. Nonetheless, commentators have argued against an exception to the privilege when the statements made to the therapist indicate that a target is in danger, and some courts have rejected such a “dangerous patient exception” to the …

Taking Confrontation Seriously: Does Crawford Mean That Confessions Must Be Cross-Examined?, Mark Summers

Mark Summers

This article focuses on the applicability of the Supreme Court's decision in Crawford v. Washington to one subcategory of party admissions – defendants’ confessions “taken by police officers in the course of interrogations.” Such statements fall within Crawford’s core class of testimonial statements, which must be subjected to cross-examination either at the time they are made or at trial in order to satisfy the Confrontation Clause. In some post-Crawford cases, defendants have argued that the failure to comply with Crawford should bar the prosecution from using their confessions. The lower courts have uniformly held that Crawford does not apply to …

The Right To Remain Silent: Addressing A Government Attorney Client Privilege In The Context Of A Grand Jury Subpoena, Matan Shmuel

Matan Shmuel

This article deals with the circuit split over whether a government agency can use government attorneys to conceal what would otherwise become public information. Often, a government agency representative might discuss with nearby agency counsel personal legal information outside the scope of their employment. Courts are split over whether this is privileged or not. My article proposes a solution to the split by implementing a factor test which takes into account the government interest in confidentiality, the public need for disclosure, and the ability of the grand jury to find the information elsewhere.