Law Commons^™

Eliminating Rule 609 To Provide A Fair Opportunity To Defend Against Criminal Charges: A Proposal To The Advisory Committee On The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

Federal Rule of Evidence 609 authorizes the admission of prior convictions to impeach criminal defendants who testify. And in this important and uniquely damaging application, the [r]ule’s logic fails, distorting American trials and depriving defendants of a fair opportunity to defend against the charges. The Advisory Committee [on Evidence Rules (the “Advisory Committee”)] should propose the elimination of Rule 609 and prohibit cross-examination with specific instances of a criminal defendant’s past conduct when those instances are unrelated to the defendant’s testimony and unconnected to the case.

This short essay begins by setting out the proposed rule change alongside a proposed …

The Precarious Art Of Classifying Facts, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

In their terrific new article, Fact Stripping, Joseph Blocher and Brandon Garrett bring formidable expertise from their respective fields to tackle the inscrutable puzzle of appellate fact review.

[...]

In this short reply I will add to Blocher and Garrett’s illuminating work by exploring a foundational confusion their article exposes. I will first explain why classifying facts as either suitable for trial or not is a very fraught endeavor; I will then argue that this difficulty allows for significant manipulation and the risk of unprincipled application. Finally, I will nod to prior work and forecast future work where I …

Ai-Based Evidence In Criminal Trials?, Sabine Gless, Fredric I. Lederer, Thomas Weigend

Faculty Publications

Smart devices are increasingly the origin of critical criminal case data. The importance of such data, especially data generated when using modern automobiles, is likely to become even more important as increasingly complex methods of machine learning lead to AI-based evidence being autonomously generated by devices. This article reviews the admissibility of such evidence from both American and German perspectives. As a result of this comparative approach, the authors conclude that American evidence law could be improved by borrowing aspects of the expert testimony approaches used in Germany’s “inquisitorial” court system.

Divided Court Finds Generic Redactions Sufficient To Admit Confessions Of Non-Testifying Codefendants, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Heien V. North Carolina And The Unreasonable "Reasonable Mistake" Of Law, Eugene R. Milhizer

Hofstra Law Review

The article discusses the Supreme Court's decision in Heien v. North Carolina, which allowed police officers to make "reasonable mistakes of law" when conducting traffic stops. It argues that such mistakes should be considered objectively unreasonable and that the evidence obtained should not always be suppressed. It explores the case's facts, the Court's reasoning, and its implications.

Justices Search For A Clear Rule For Confessions In Joint Trials, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

The Evidentiary Challenges Of Confessions In Co-Defendant Trials, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Proving Copying, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Peter S. Menell

William & Mary Law Review

Proof that a defendant actually copied from a copyrighted work is a critical part of a claim for copyright infringement. Indeed, absent such copying, there is no infringement. The most common method of proving copying involves the use of circumstantial evidence, consisting of proof that a defendant had “access” to the protected work, and a showing of “similarities” between the copy and the protected work. In inferring copying from the combination of such evidence, courts have for many decades developed a framework known as the “inverse ratio rule,” which allows them to modulate the level of proof needed on access …

Between Evidence And Facts: An Argumentative Perspective Of Legal Evidence, Wenjing Du, Minghui Xiong

OSSA Conference Archive

In this paper, we will present an argumentative view of legal evidence. In an argumentation-based litigation game, the only purpose of the suitor (S) or the respondent (R) is to maximize their own legal rights while the purpose of the trier (T) is to maintain judicial fairness and justice. Different selections of evidence and different orders of presenting evidence will lead to different case-facts and even adjudicative results, the purpose of litigation is to reconcile a balance among the three parties - S, R, and T.

The Acquisition Of Scientific Evidence Between Frye And Daubert. From Ad Hominem Arguments To Cross-Examination Among Experts, Lorenzo Zoppellari

OSSA Conference Archive

The Frye and Daubert rulings give us two very different ways to intend the relation between law and science. Through the contributions of Wellman and Walton, we will see how the main method to question the expert’s testimony before a judge deferent to science is to question her personal integrity by using ad hominem arguments. Otherwise, using Alvin Goldman’s novice/expert problem, we will investigate if other manners of argumentative cross-examinations are possible.

Cognitive Agendas And Legal Epistemology, Danny Marrero

Graduate Theses and Dissertations

The domain of legal epistemology is defined from two alternative perspectives: individual epistemology and Social epistemology. Since these perspectives have different objects of evaluation, their judgments privilege and exclude different sets of information. While methodological individualism is concerned with justified beliefs of individual knowers, the Social angle focuses on the institutional conditions of knowledge. I will show that the information that is respectively excluded by both the individual and the Social concepts of legal epistemology weaken their respective evaluations. With this in mind, I will explore one new option of defining legal epistemology. This alternative is more comprehensive, in the …

Confrontation Clause

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Organised Resistance, Terrorism And Criminality In Ireland: The State's Construction Of The Control Equation, Mark Findlay

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Despite the reality of partition that created "two Irelands," comparative analysis of the state's reactions to terrorism in the Province and in the Republic is rare. The struggle over reunification, which permeates society on both sides of the border, is usually viewed by the populist press not from the Irish viewpoint, but rather from the perspective of the British government. Given this bias, organized resistance -- most notably in the North of Ireland -- is represented as an assault on a majority-supported state. Because the legitimacy of the state under attack is rarely questioned, and the motivations for the resistance …

Prematurity And Obiter Dictum In Indian Judicial Thought, William D. Popkin

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.