Law Commons^™

The Language Of Consent In Police Encounters, Janice Nadler, J.D. Trout

Faculty Working Papers

In this chapter, we examine the nature of conversations in citizen-police encounters in which police seek to conduct a search based on the citizen's consent. We argue that when police officers ask a person if they can search, citizens often feel enormous pressure to say yes. But judges routinely ignore these pressures, choosing instead to spotlight the politeness and restraint of the officers' language and demeanor. Courts often analyze the language of police encounters as if the conversation has an obvious, context-free meaning. The pragmatic features of language influence behavior, but courts routinely ignore or deny this fact. Instead, current …

The Arts Of Persuasion In Science And Law: Conflicting Norms In The Courtroom, Herbert M. Kritzer

Law and Contemporary Problems

Epistemology is important in the debate about science and technology in the courtroom. The epistemological issues and the arguments about them in the context of scientific and technical evidence are now well developed. Of equal importance, though, is an understanding of norms of persuasion and how those norms may differ across disciplines and groups. Norms of persuasion in the courtroom and in legal briefs differ from norms at a scientific conference and in scientific journals. Here, Kritzer examines the disconnect between science and the courtroom in terms of the differing norms of persuasion found within the scientific community and within …

My Lawyer Told Me To Say I'M Sorry: Lawyers, Doctors, And Medical Apologies, Peter B. Knapp

Faculty Scholarship

The role of apologies in litigation has received a great deal of attention in the last ten years. This is particularly true of “medical apologies,” those expressions of regret and, in some cases, admissions of responsibility made by health care professionals. Two recent trends have prompted examination of medical apologies. First, widely reported empirical studies suggest that patients and their families may be less likely to bring malpractice lawsuits following adverse outcomes if treating physicians have apologized. Second, over about the past ten years, two-thirds of the states have adopted statutes that exclude these apologies from evidence if there is …

Ferreting Out Favoritism: Bringing Pretext Claims After Kelo, Daniel S. Hafetz

Fordham Law Review

In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Kelo v. City of New London that governments may take one’s private property and give it to another for the purpose of promoting economic development.  The Court held that, in evaluating Fifth Amendment challenges to such takings, courts should defer to legislative judgments as to what constitutes a valid public purpose.  Critics argue that this decision opened the floodgates to pretextual abuse.  Specifically, they contend that local governments that exercise the eminent domain power are often motivated by a desire to favor another private party.  After Kelo, courts have struggled to reconcile …

Burden Of Proof, Prima Facie Case And Presumption In Wto Dispute Settlement, John J. Barcelo Iii

Cornell International Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Scientific Evidence And Prosecutorial Misconduct In The Duke Lacrosse Rape Case, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

The need for pretrial discovery in criminal cases is critical. A defendant's right to confrontation, effective assistance of counsel, and due process often turns on pretrial disclosure. This essay discusses a case that demonstrates this point.

The Nrc Report And Its Implications For Criminal Litigation, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

The National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, issued a landmark report on forensic science in February 2009. In the long run, the report’s recommendations, if adopted, would benefit law enforcement and prosecutors. The recommendations would allow forensic science to develop a strong scientific basis and limit evidentiary challenges regarding the reliability of forensic evidence. In keeping with its congressional charge, however, the NRC Committee did not directly address admissibility issues. Nevertheless, given its content, the report will inevitably be cited in criminal cases. Indeed, within months, the United States Supreme Court cited the report, noting …

Working Without A Net: The Third Circuit Juggles Skepticism And Deference Inside The Ring Of Products Liability Experts After The Daubert Trilogy In Pineda V. Ford Motor Co. & (And) Calhoun V. Yamaha Corp., Jennifer E. Burke

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Protecting The Predator Or The Prey - The Missouri Supreme Court's Refusal To Allow Past Sexual Misconduct As Propensity Evidence, William E. Marcantel

Missouri Law Review

Americans consider child molestation and sexual assault among the most heinous crimes that one can commit. In response to the public's opinion regarding these crimes, Congress created exceptions to the longstanding rule barring character propensity evidence. Over the protests of prominent lefal figures, Congress enacted Federal Rules of Evidence 413- 415 in 1994. Though these rules have been sustained by several appellate court decisions, the constitutionality of Rules 413-415 has not been conclusively decided by the United States Supreme Court. Missouri's legislature has twice attempted to pass a statute regarding child molestation similar to Federal Rule of Evidence 414, and …

The Unabomber Revisited: Reexamining The Use Of Mental Disorder Diagnoses As Evidence Of The Mental Condition Of Criminal Defendants, Adam K. Magid

Indiana Law Journal

This Article revisits a longstanding debate concerning the appropriateness of diagnostic evidence in criminal cases in which a defendant’s mental condition is at issue. As illustrated through a case study of Theodore Kaczynski, more widely known as the “Unabomber,” a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia poses a risk of confounding a judge or jury attempting to ascertain an accurate picture of the mental state of a criminal defendant, specifically by (i) suggesting symptoms not actually present, (ii) creating a distorted picture of symptoms that are present, and (iii) suggesting organic, determinative factors as the mechanism behind a defendant’s actions, even where …

'False But Highly Persuasive:' How Wrong Were The Probability Estimates In Mcdaniel V. Brown?, David H. Kaye

Faculty Scholarship

In McDaniel v. Brown, the Supreme Court will review the use of DNA evidence in a 1994 trial for sexual assault and attempted murder. The Court granted certiorari to consider two procedural issues - the standard of federal postconviction review of a state jury verdict for sufficiency of the evidence, and the district court's decision to allow the prisoner to supplement the record of trials, appeals, and state postconviction proceedings with a geneticist's letter twelve years after the trial.

This essay clarifies the nature and extent of the errors in the presentation of the DNA evidence in Brown. It questions …

How Does Science Come To Speak In The Courts? Citations Intertexts, Expert Witnesses, Consequential Facts, And Reasoning, Charles Bazerman

Law and Contemporary Problems

Citations, in their highly conventionalized forms, visibly indicate each texts explicit use of the prior literature that embodies the knowledge and contentions of its field. This relation to prior texts has been called intertextuality in literary and literacy studies. Here, Bazerman discusses the citation practices and intertextuality in science and the law in theoretical and historical perspective, and considers the intersection of science and law by identifying the judicial rules that limit and shape the role of scientific literature in court proceedings. He emphasizes that from the historical and theoretical analysis, it is clear that, in the US, judicial reasoning …

Reconciling Classified Evidence And A Petitioner's Right To A "Meaningful Review" At Guantanamo Bay: A Legislative Solution, Sarah Lorr

Fordham Law Review

In Boumediene v. Bush, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the detainees held at Guantánamo Bay have a constitutional right to a writ of habeas corpus and are entitled to a “meaningful review” of their habeas petitions. This Note attempts to reconcile the need for a “meaningful review” with the government’s reliance on classified evidence that is completely inaccessible to the detainee-petitioners. After examining three other contexts in which the reliance on classified evidence has been sanctioned—federal criminal courts, immigration cases, and the ongoing military commissions at Guantánamo—this Note concludes that a “meaningful review” of the Guantánamo habeas petitions requires …

A Matter Of Context: Social Framework Evidence In Employment Discrimination Class Actions, Melissa Hart, Paul M. Secunda

Fordham Law Review

In litigation disputes over the certification of employment discrimination class actions, social scientists have come to play a central, yet controversial, role. Organizational behavioralists and social psychologists regularly testify for the plaintiffs, offering what is commonly referred to as social framework testimony. These experts explain the general social science research on the operation of stereotyping and bias in decision making and examine the challenged workplace to identify those policies and practices that research has shown will tend to increase and those that will tend to limit the likely impact of these factors. Defendants fight hard against the admission of social …

Law, Statistics, And The Reference Class Problem, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Statistical data are powerful, if not crucial, pieces of evidence in the courtroom. Whether one is trying to demonstrate the rarity of a DNA profile, estimate the value of damaged property, or determine the likelihood that a criminal defendant will recidivate, statistics often have an important role to play. Statistics, however, raise a number of serious challenges for the legal system, including concerns that they are difficult to understand, are given too much deference from juries, or are easily manipulated by the parties' experts. In this preview piece, I address one of these challenges, known as the "reference class problem," …

Techno-Jury: Techniques In Verbal And Visual Persuasion, Gregory J. Morse

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dickey V. State: Jury Instruction On Drug Use And Its Concomitant Effect On Eyewitness Credibility, Rachel M. Witriol

Maryland Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

What Evidence Will Justify An Allocation Of Liability Among Responsible Parties Under Superfund?, Robert H. Abrams

Journal Publications

Burlington No. & Santa Fe R. Co. v. United States and Shell Oil Co. v. United States Docket Nos. 07-1601 and 07-1607. Argument date: February 24, 2009, From: The Ninth Circuit

Case at a Glance: Over a 30-year period Shell Oil delivered bulk agricultural chemicals to a now-contaminated reseller's site in California. Part of the site was leased from Burlington Northern Railroad. When the site operator failed, the United States and California incurred costs in cleaning the parcel and successfully sought to impose joint and several liability on Shell and the railroad. Shell contends it is not liable under Superfund …

A Witness To Justice, Jessica Silbey

Faculty Scholarship

In the 1988 film The Accused, a young woman named Sarah Tobias is gang raped on a pinball machine by three men while a crowded bar watches. The rapists cut a deal with the prosecutor. Sarah's outrage at the deal convinces the assistant district attorney to prosecute members of the crowd that cheered on and encouraged the rape. This film shows how Sarah Tobias, a woman with little means and less experience, intuits that according to the law rape victims are incredible witnesses to their own victimization. The film goes on to critique what the right kind of witness would …

Propensity Or Stereotype?: A Bad Evidence Experiment In Indian Country, Aviva Orenstein

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In a significant break with traditional evidence rules and policies, the Federal Rules of Evidence concerning rape and child abuse, Rules 413 and 414, permit the government to admit the accused’s prior sexual misconduct as evidence of character and propensity. Although these rules have been roundly criticized, insufficient attention has been paid to the fact that in allowing propensity evidence for federal sex offenses (as opposed to offenses under state law), these rules disproportionately affect one distinct civilian population: Indians.

The de facto concentration of Rules 413-414 cases in Indian Country raises troubling questions regarding what it means to have …

His Brain Has Been Mismanaged With Great Skill: How Will Jurors Respond To Neuroimaging Testimony In Insanity Defense Cases, Michael L. Perlin

Articles & Chapters

The robust debate over neuroimaging has highlighted a series of law-and-policy questions dealing primarily with reliability, admissibility and availability. When we consider the topic that I will be addressing in this paper - the impact of this evidence on juror decision-making in insanity defense cases - we need to recalibrate our focus so as to incorporate other questions that are as essential (most likely, more essential) to the resolution of the underlying dilemma: (1) to what extent will such evidence - apparently, less inherently easy to falsify - have on jurors whose inherent suspicion of mental state opinion testimony is …

Irreconcilable Differences? The Troubled Marriage Of Science And Law, Susan Haack

Law and Contemporary Problems

There haven't always been scientific witnesses: in fact, there haven't always been witnesses. In early medieval times, courts relied on tests by oath, ordeal, and sometimes by combat. Here, Haack provides a brief historical background to the use of scientific experts in law and then proceeds to discuss in greater detail the values underlying scientific inquiry, the uncertainty in the quest of knowledge and understanding, and the methods by which consensus is reached, even if that consensus is always tentative. She then contrasts scientific inquiry with the law's quest for "truth" in the courtroom and, particularly, the normative and temporal …

Essay: Conventions In Science And In The Courts: Images And Realities, Jerome R. Ravetz

Law and Contemporary Problems

No abstract provided.

Science, Law And The Expert Witness, Joseph Sanders

Law and Contemporary Problems

Expert witnessing is a particularly useful place to observe the clash of legal and scientific conventions because it is here that one group of people (scientific experts) who are integrated into one set of conventions are challenged by the expectations of a different set of conventions. Here, Sanders looks at how legal conventions affect the behavior of expert witnesses when they appear in court in both criminal and civil cases. He also reviews differences in scientific and legal conventions as they apply to expert knowledge and discusses two central reasons for these differences: adversarialism and closure.

How Much Evidence Is Enough? Conventions Of Causal Inference, David Kriebel

Law and Contemporary Problems

One of the most important issues for science in the courtroom is the determination of causality. Like science in the courtroom, science in the regulatory arena can also bring a clash of cultures, misunderstanding, and controversy--especially when decisions must be made with some urgency with interested parties watching closely. Here, Kriebel discusses some conventions in the conduct of science and in the ways that scientific information is communicated to nonscientists that can make it difficult for judges, lawyers, regulators, and politicians to do their jobs making decisions about complex environmental and health issues.

Trials And Tribulations: What Happens When Historians Enter The Courtroom, David Rosner

Law and Contemporary Problems

In recent years, historians have been brought into legal cases in unprecedented numbers. As the courts have tried to adjudicate responsibility for environmental and occupational diseases, history has played an increasingly central role in decisions that affect the cases themselves and in social policy regarding risk. In suits over tobacco-related diseases, asbestosis, radiation, and other toxic substances, more historians of technology and science, social history, and public health are being sought to provide testimony aimed at assessing responsibility for damages that have arisen years--sometimes decades--after exposure. Here, Rosner traces the use of historians as experts in litigation.

Merton And The Hot Tub: Scientific Conventions And Expert Evidence In Australian Civil Procedure, Gary Edmond

Law and Contemporary Problems

Recently in Australia, common-law judges began to modify the way expert evidence is prepared and presented. Judges from a range of civil jurisdictions have conscientiously sought to reduce expert partisanship and the extent of expert disagreement in an attempt to enhance procedural efficiency and improve access to justice. One of these reforms, concurrent evidence, enables expert witnesses to participate in a joint session with considerable testimonial latitude. This represents a shift away from an adversarial approach and a conscientious attempt to foster scientific values and norms. Here, Edmond describes how changes to Australian civil procedure, motivated by judicial concerns about …

Rounding Up The Usual Suspects: A Logical And Legal Analysis Of Dna Trawling Cases, David H. Kaye

Faculty Scholarship

Courts are beginning to confront a problem that has divided the scientific community - whether identifying a defendant by fishing through a database of DNA types to find a match to a crime-scene sample reduces the significance of a match. For years, the problem seemed academic. Now that the U.S. has more than five million DNA profiles from convicted offenders and suspects in a national, computer-searchable database, the question has assumed more urgency. Increasingly, individuals are being charged with crimes as a result of a match between their recorded profile and the DNA from a victim or scene of a …

The Power Of Collaboration: Worldcat's Copyright Evidence Registry, Roger V. Skalbeck

Law Faculty Publications

One of the underlying obstacles to reproducing older books is that there's no central place to look for information about what is protected by copyright and what may have passed into the public domain. Responding to this need, OCLC recently introduced a new system for tracking various copyright details for published books. The new service, still in beta, is called the WorldCat Copyright Evidence Registry (CER). It could be a very valuable resource for recording and sharing copyright status information.

The Right Remedy For The Wrongly Convicted: Judicial Sanction For Destruction Of Dna Evidence, Cynthia E. Jones

Fordham Law Review

Many state innocence protection statutes give courts the power to impose appropriate sanctions when biological evidence needed for postconviction DNA testing is wrongly destroyed by the government. Constitutional claims based on wrongful evidence destruction are governed by the virtually insurmountable “bad faith” standard articulated in Arizona v. Youngblood. The wrongful destruction of DNA evidence in contravention of state innocence protection laws, however, should be governed by the standards used to adjudicate other “access to evidence” violations in criminal cases, including disclosures mandated by the rules of criminal procedure, the Jencks Act, and Brady v. Maryland. Under the “access to evidence” …