Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Seattle University School of Law (212)
- University of Michigan Law School (127)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (106)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (46)
- West Virginia University (46)
-
- UIC School of Law (36)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (34)
- University of Richmond (34)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (34)
- University of Maine School of Law (33)
- William & Mary Law School (33)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (32)
- American University Washington College of Law (30)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (29)
- Roger Williams University (28)
- Brooklyn Law School (25)
- Pepperdine University (23)
- University of Georgia School of Law (20)
- BLR (19)
- Cleveland State University (19)
- Cornell University Law School (19)
- Fordham Law School (19)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (19)
- The University of Akron (18)
- University of Baltimore Law (18)
- Georgetown University Law Center (17)
- Georgia State University College of Law (14)
- Pace University (13)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (13)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (12)
- Keyword
-
- Evidence (335)
- Criminal law (98)
- Criminal Law (67)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (56)
- Fourth Amendment (45)
-
- Testimony (41)
- Constitutional Law (38)
- Criminal procedure (36)
- Due process (36)
- Admissibility (34)
- Privacy (32)
- Law (31)
- DNA (30)
- Hearsay (30)
- Sixth Amendment (30)
- Supreme Court (30)
- Confrontation Clause (29)
- Fifth Amendment (29)
- Exclusionary rule (28)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (27)
- Search and seizure (26)
- Witnesses (24)
- Witness (23)
- Expert testimony (21)
- Rape (21)
- Constitution (20)
- Criminal (20)
- Fourth amendment (20)
- Police (20)
- Criminal Procedure (19)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (209)
- Michigan Law Review (99)
- Faculty Scholarship (82)
- Cardozo Law Review (61)
- West Virginia Law Review (44)
-
- Touro Law Review (39)
- Maine Law Review (32)
- UIC Law Review (30)
- University of Richmond Law Review (28)
- Faculty Publications (26)
- Pepperdine Law Review (23)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (22)
- Articles (21)
- Indiana Law Journal (21)
- ExpressO (19)
- Akron Law Review (18)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (18)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (17)
- Roger Williams University Law Review (17)
- All Faculty Scholarship (16)
- Scholarly Works (16)
- Cleveland State Law Review (15)
- Nevada Supreme Court Summaries (15)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (15)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (14)
- Georgia State University Law Review (13)
- Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal (12)
- Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications (10)
- Supreme Court Case Files (10)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (9)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 871 - 900 of 1442
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Law
Opinion Testimony: Lay, Expert, Or Something Else?, H. Patrick Furman
Opinion Testimony: Lay, Expert, Or Something Else?, H. Patrick Furman
Publications
This article discusses opinion testimony of lay witnesses and expert witnesses. It provides an overview of lay opinion testimony and discusses the dividing line between lay and opinion testimony.
Dna Is Different:Implications Of The Public Perception Ofdna Evidence On Police Interrogation Methods, Christine D. Salmon
Dna Is Different:Implications Of The Public Perception Ofdna Evidence On Police Interrogation Methods, Christine D. Salmon
Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest
These reform proposals have been met with vehement criticism, most of which stem from a concern that any attempt to prohibit or regulate deceptive interrogation methods would decrease the number of confessions and convictions produced by the criminal justice system. With these concerns in mind, this article proposes a different, more moderate reform: a per se ban on the falsification of DNA evidence during police interrogations. This proposal differs from those described above in three important ways. First, the prohibition on fabricating DNA evidence does not require a change in the voluntariness test used to ascertain the admissibility of a …
Cross Dressing And The Criminal, Bennett Capers
Cross Dressing And The Criminal, Bennett Capers
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Case Comment - People V. Nelson: A Tale Of Two Statistics, David H. Kaye
Case Comment - People V. Nelson: A Tale Of Two Statistics, David H. Kaye
Faculty Scholarship
In recent years, defendants who were identified as a result of a search through a database of DNA profiles have argued that the probability that a randomly selected person would match a crime-scene stain overstates the probative value of the match. The statistical literature is divided, with most statisticians who have written on the subject rejecting this claim. In People v. Nelson, the Supreme Court of California held that when the random-match probability is so small as to make it exceedingly unlikely that any unrelated individual has the incriminating DNA profile, this statistic is admissible in a database-search case. …
Experts, Mental States, And Acts, Christopher Slobogin
Experts, Mental States, And Acts, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
This article, written for a symposium on "Guilt v. Guiltiness: Are the Right Rules for Trying Factual Innocence Inevitably the Wrong Rules for Trying Culpability?," argues that the definition of expertise in the criminal justice system, derived in the federal courts and in most states from Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Co., should vary depending on whether the issue involved is past mental state or past conduct. While expert psychological testimony about past acts ought to be based on scientifically verifiable assertions, expert psychological testimony about subjective mental states relevant to criminal responsibility need not meet the same threshold. This …
Fixing The Fatal Flaws In Oui Implied Consent Laws, Tina Wescott Cafaro
Fixing The Fatal Flaws In Oui Implied Consent Laws, Tina Wescott Cafaro
Faculty Scholarship
This Article explores the use of implied consent laws as a method of deterring and punishing alcohol-impaired driving. Part I introduces the history and purpose of implied consent laws. Part II discusses the inadequacies of current statutory implied consent provisions and their failure to effectively attain their designed purpose. This section also highlights two particularly detrimental aspects of the law as currently implemented: (1) the lack of uniformity in the application of the laws by individual states; and (2) the disparate treatment of persons who refuse to submit to BAC testing, both in terms of consequences of refusal to submit …
Statistics In The Jury Box: How Jurors Respond To Mitochondrial Dna Match Probabilities, David H. Kaye, Valerie P. Hans, B. Michael Dann, Erin J. Farley, Stephanie Albertson
Statistics In The Jury Box: How Jurors Respond To Mitochondrial Dna Match Probabilities, David H. Kaye, Valerie P. Hans, B. Michael Dann, Erin J. Farley, Stephanie Albertson
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
This article describes parts of an unusually realistic experiment on the comprehension of expert testimony on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequencing in a criminal trial for robbery. Specifically, we examine how jurors who responded to summonses for jury duty evaluated portions of videotaped testimony involving probabilities and statistics. Although some jurors showed susceptibility to classic fallacies in interpreting conditional probabilities, the jurors as a whole were not overwhelmed by a 99.98% exclusion probability that the prosecution presented. Cognitive errors favoring the defense were more prevalent than ones favoring the prosecution. These findings lend scant support to the legal argument that mtDNA …
Criminal Law And Procedure, Marla G. Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough Jr.
Criminal Law And Procedure, Marla G. Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
The authors have endeavored to select from the many appellate cases those that have the most significant precedential value. The article also outlines some of the most consequential changes tothe law enacted by the Virginia General Assembly in the areas ofcriminal law and procedure.
Rethinking Dui Law In Virginia, Monte Kuligowski
Rethinking Dui Law In Virginia, Monte Kuligowski
University of Richmond Law Review
As the demand for safer roadways needs little supporting argument, I turn to the constitutional problem of strict criminal liability law, followed with a brief analysis of criminal intent and strict liability law within the criminal system, some examples of how other states have responded to the inherent tensions, and a few specific thoughts for the legislature to consider.
Mediating Rules In Criminal Law, Alex Stein, Richard A. Bierschbach
Mediating Rules In Criminal Law, Alex Stein, Richard A. Bierschbach
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Deterrence, Retributivism, And The Law Of Evidence, Richard A. Bierschbach, Alex Stein
Deterrence, Retributivism, And The Law Of Evidence, Richard A. Bierschbach, Alex Stein
Articles
Legal scholarship has long treated substantive criminal law and evidence as two separate and distinct fields. The former largely concerns itself with evaluating substantive criminal law rules by reference to various animating theories-most prominently, those of deterrence and retributivism.' Scholars, students, and policymakers laud or condemn doctrines based on notions of "just deserts" or ideas about the incentives they create for those disposed to commit a crime. When it comes to the numerous evidentiary and other rules that determine the course of prosecutions and proof, however, the conversation is different. Here, questions of reliability, evidential worth, and accuracy in fact-finding …
Mediating Rules In Criminal Law, Richard A. Bierschbach, Alex Stein
Mediating Rules In Criminal Law, Richard A. Bierschbach, Alex Stein
Articles
This Article challenges the conventional divide between substantive criminal law theory, on the one hand, and evidence law, on the other, by exposing an important and unrecognized function of evidence rules in criminal law. Throughout the criminal law, special rules of evidence work to mediate conflicts between criminal law's deterrence and retributivist goals. They do this by skewing errors in the actual application of the substantive criminal law to favor whichever theory has been disfavored by the substantive rule itself The mediating potential of evidentiary rules is particularly strong in criminal law because the substantive law's dominant animating theories-deterrence and …
Credibility: A Fair Subject For Expert Testimony?, Anne Poulin
Credibility: A Fair Subject For Expert Testimony?, Anne Poulin
Working Paper Series
This article explores the ways in which experts can assist the jury to assess the credibility of other witnesses and suggests analytical approaches to such expert testimony. The article argues that the courts should be more receptive to expert testimony bearing on witness credibility and engage in a more nuanced consideration of the role played by proffered expert testimony and how the role of the evidence affects its admissibility. Doing so should lead the courts to embrace the promise of the modern rules of evidence and permit experts to assist juries as they assess credibility.
Every Juror Wants A Story: Narrative Relevance, Third Party Guilt And The Right To Present A Defense, John H. Blume, Sheri L. Johnson, Emily C. Paavola
Every Juror Wants A Story: Narrative Relevance, Third Party Guilt And The Right To Present A Defense, John H. Blume, Sheri L. Johnson, Emily C. Paavola
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
On occasion, criminal defendants hope to convince a jury that the state has not met its burden of proving them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by offering evidence that someone else (a third party) committed the crime. Currently, state and federal courts assess the admissibility of evidence of third-party guilt using a variety of standards. In general, however, there are two basic approaches. Many state courts require a defendant to proffer evidence of some sort of direct link or connection between a specific third-party and the crime. A second group of state courts, as well as federal courts, admit evidence …
An Uninvited Guest: The Federal Death Penalty And The Massachusetts Prosecution Of Nurse Kristen Gilbert, John P. Cunningham
An Uninvited Guest: The Federal Death Penalty And The Massachusetts Prosecution Of Nurse Kristen Gilbert, John P. Cunningham
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Efforts To Improve The Illinois Capital Punishment System: Worth The Cost?, Thomas P. Sullivan
Efforts To Improve The Illinois Capital Punishment System: Worth The Cost?, Thomas P. Sullivan
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Holistic Culpability, Kimberly Kessler Ferzan
Holistic Culpability, Kimberly Kessler Ferzan
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Tripartite Structures Of Criminal Law In Germany And Other Civil Law Jurisdictions, Russell L. Christopher
Tripartite Structures Of Criminal Law In Germany And Other Civil Law Jurisdictions, Russell L. Christopher
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Conundrum Of Mental States: Substantive Rules And Evidence Combined, Keren Shapira-Ettinger
The Conundrum Of Mental States: Substantive Rules And Evidence Combined, Keren Shapira-Ettinger
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Source-Centric Framework To The Exclusionary Rule, Luke M. Milligan
The Source-Centric Framework To The Exclusionary Rule, Luke M. Milligan
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Miranda Is Not Enough: A New Justification For Demanding "Strong Corroboration" To A Confession, Boaz Sangero
Miranda Is Not Enough: A New Justification For Demanding "Strong Corroboration" To A Confession, Boaz Sangero
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Can A Jury Believe My Eyes, And Should Courts Let Experts Tell Them Why Not? The Admissibility Of Expert Testimony On Cross-Racial Eyewitness Identification In New York After People V. Young, Jody E. Frampton
Pace Law Review
No abstract provided.
Hudson And Samson: The Roberts Court Confronts Privacy, Dignity, And The Fourth Amendment, John D. Castiglione
Hudson And Samson: The Roberts Court Confronts Privacy, Dignity, And The Fourth Amendment, John D. Castiglione
ExpressO
This article critically analyzes Samson v. California and Hudson v. Michigan, which were the Roberts Court's first major Fourth Amendment decisions. In Samson, the Court upheld a California law allowing government officials to search parolees without any suspicion of wrongdoing. In Hudson, to the surprise of almost every observer, the Court held that knock-and-announce violations do not carry with them a remedy of exclusion. What was most notable about Hudson was not only that it rejected what every state and every federal court, save one, believed to be the proper remedy for knock-and-announce violations, but that it called into question …
Prosecutors: Factors To Aid Your Filing Decisions With Respect To Fatal Traffic Collisions, Kimberly Rebecca Bird
Prosecutors: Factors To Aid Your Filing Decisions With Respect To Fatal Traffic Collisions, Kimberly Rebecca Bird
ExpressO
As you may know, on a fairly regular basis, prosecutors are faced with filing decisions with respect to fatal traffic collisions. Many of them, of course, do not involve criminal negligence and are not prosecuted as crimes. Sometimes, on the other hand, the circumstances are egregious and the decision to be made is whether to file a case as a vehicular manslaughter or as a murder, on an implied malice theory. There are a finite number of California Supreme Court and Court of Appeal cases (beginning with People v. Watson (1981) 30 Cal.3d 290) that have addressed the sufficiency of …
Wiretapping And Eavesdropping: Surveillance In The Internet Age, 3rd Ed., Anne T. Mckenna, Clifford S. Fishman
Wiretapping And Eavesdropping: Surveillance In The Internet Age, 3rd Ed., Anne T. Mckenna, Clifford S. Fishman
Books
The third edition of the seminal “Fishman & McKenna” Wiretapping treatise analyzes federal and state law and the rapidly evolving civil and criminal legal issues and privacy issues surrounding the Internet, computers, cellular devices, electronic location tracking, drones, and biometrics. Since its publication, this treatise has been cited in multiple published federal and state judicial opinions, including by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in August 2010 and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in August 2014. The third edition is a well-known resource for attorneys working in private practice and in …
Chimeras: Double The Dna - Double The Fun For Crime Scene Investigators, Prosecutors, And Defense Attorneys?, Catherine Arcabascio
Chimeras: Double The Dna - Double The Fun For Crime Scene Investigators, Prosecutors, And Defense Attorneys?, Catherine Arcabascio
Faculty Scholarship
This article first explores the mythological origins of the term "chimera." It then explores the causes and scientific explanations of chimerism and the various conditions covered by the term chimera in the area of genetics. Although this article will discuss the various chimeric conditions that are thought to exist, its primary focus is on chimerism that is the result of the fusing of embryos in utero. Next, the article will discuss recent cases of chimerism - and of alleged chimerism - and how the genetic differences between chimeras and the general population came to light. It also will discuss …
The Youngblood Success Stories: Overcoming The "Bad Faith" Destruction Of Evidence Standard, Teresa N. Chen
The Youngblood Success Stories: Overcoming The "Bad Faith" Destruction Of Evidence Standard, Teresa N. Chen
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
An Agument For Original Intent: Restoring Rule 801 (D) (1) (A) To Protect Domestic Violence Victims In A Post-Crawford World., Andrew King-Ries
An Agument For Original Intent: Restoring Rule 801 (D) (1) (A) To Protect Domestic Violence Victims In A Post-Crawford World., Andrew King-Ries
Faculty Law Review Articles
Prosecution of domestic violence is extremely difficult, largely due to the fact that defendants are successfully pressuring victims to refuse to testify or to recant their testimony at trial. With its decision in Crawford, the Supreme Court eliminated the ability of prosecutors to use hearsay exceptions to place the domestic violence victim's statements before the jury for their substantive consideration. The Supreme Court also closed this avenue to combat defendants' efforts to avoid liability through coercive pressure on victims. Therefore, the Court's change in the Confrontation Clause law limits the prosecution's arsenal for combating witness intimidation and, at the same …
A Suspicionless Search And Seizure Quagmire: The Supreme Court Revives The Pretext Doctrine And Creates Another Fine Fourth Amendment Mess, Edwin J. Butterfoss
A Suspicionless Search And Seizure Quagmire: The Supreme Court Revives The Pretext Doctrine And Creates Another Fine Fourth Amendment Mess, Edwin J. Butterfoss
Faculty Scholarship
This Article contends the Supreme Court's use of a primary purpose test to regulate suspicionless searches and seizures by the government is misguided and will provide little or no protection against the evils that apparently led the Court to strike down recent schemes by government officials. The evil of the government schemes is less the purpose of the schemes than their expansion into areas and activities in which citizens should be protected from government intrusion in the absence of any suspicion of wrongdoing. Rather than facing this head on and carefully assessing whether the government schemes infringe on such areas …
Truth, Deterrence, And The Impeachment Exception , James L. Kainen
Truth, Deterrence, And The Impeachment Exception , James L. Kainen
Faculty Scholarship
James v. Illinois permits illegally-obtained evidence to impeach defendants, but not defense witnesses. Thus far, all courts have construed James to allow impeachment of defendants' hearsay declarations. This article argues against allowing illegally-obtained evidence to impeach defendants' hearsay declarations because doing so unduly diminishes the exclusionary rule's deterrent effect. The distinction between impeaching defendants and defense witnesses disappears when courts allow prosecutors to impeach defendants' hearsay declarations. Because defense witnesses report exculpatory conduct of a defendant who always has a substantial interest in disguising his criminality, their testimony routinely incorporates defendant hearsay. Defense witness testimony thus routinely paves the way …