Criminal Procedure Commons^™

Malley V. Briggs: The Court Offers A Civil Remedy For Fourth Amendment Violations On The Wake Of An Eroding Exclusionary Rule, 19 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1101 (1986), Ellen Keefe-Garner

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Gates, Leon And The Compromise Of Adjudicatory Fairness: (Part Ii)-Aggressive Majoritarianism, Willful Deafness, And The New Exception To The Exclusionary Rule, Joel J. Finer

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This Article will offer an elaboration of the idea of judicial "aggressiveness" (which Professor Stone, by and large, leaves undefined) through examination of the majority opinion in United States v. Leon and its application in Massachusetts v. Sheppard. It will also advance the thesis that the majority in Leon exhibited a particular kind of aggressiveness--willful deafness.

Hearsay Rule, Peter K. Westen

Book Chapters

The hearsay rule is a non constitutional rule of evidence which obtains in one form or another in every jurisdiction in the country. The rule provides that in the absence of explicit exceptions to the contrary, hearsay evidence of a matter in dispute is inadmissible as proof of the matter. Although jurisdictions define "hearsay" in different ways, the various definitions reflect a common principle: evidence that derives its relevance in a case from the belief of a person who is not present in court—and thus not under oath and not subject to cross-examination regarding his credibility—is of questionable probative value.

Modern Evidence And The Expert Witness, Faust Rossi

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

I Cannot Tell A Lie: The Standard For New Trial In False Testimony Cases, Daniel Wolf

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines the question of what standard should be used for granting a new trial when a defendant's conviction is alleged to have been based, at least in part, on false testimony. Part I demonstrates the failure of the existing standards to strike a satisfactory balance between defendants' rights and the efficient administration of the criminal justice system. Part II argues that motions for retrial based upon false testimony should be governed by a standard drawn not only from newly discovered evidence cases generally, but also from cases involving prosecutorial misconduct. Finally, Part III suggests that the proper test …

The Admissibility Of Prior Silence To Impeach The Testimony Of Criminal Defendants, Rex A. Sharp

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note focuses on whether a defendant who was called as a witness at the prior, severed trial of a codefendant and refused to testify by invoking the fifth amendment can subsequently be impeached by this silence at his own trial. In addition to the obvious implications this issue has for severed criminal trials, the factors considered when deciding whether impeachment by silence should be allowed generally are in sharpest focus in this factual setting. Thus, the analysis of the constitutional and evidentiary questions this Note enlists to argue that impeachment by silence in this context is permissible applies as …

Unmasking The Criminal: A Proposal To Prevent The Accessibility Of False Identification, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 789 (1985), Gerard Ring

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Burger Court And Prosecutorial Misconduct, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Professor Gershman critically examines a series of recent Supreme Court decisions dealing with prosecutorial misconduct. In each case, the Court reversed the lower court and reinstated the conviction.

There are a broad range of issues involved; from suppression of evidence to trial misconduct. As a former prosecutor in New York City, the author is forced to conclude that, "Prosecutorial misconduct occurs because it works and because sanctions for misbehavior are virtually nonexistent."

Does A Criminal Defendant Have A Constitutional Right To Compel The Production Of Privileged Testimony Through Use Immunity, Louis M. Natali Jr.

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Testing The Reliability Of Coconspirators' Statements Admitted Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 801(D)(2)(E): Putting The Claws Back In The Confrontation Clause, Daniel R. Rizzolo

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Gates, Leon And The Compromise Of Adjudicatory Fairness: (Part I)-A Dialogue On Prejudicial Concurrences, Joel J. Finer

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

On July 5, 1984, the Supreme Court in Leon v. United States held that where law enforcement officials execute a search warrant issued in violation of the dictates of the fourth amendment but act in the "good faith," "objectively-reasonable" belief that the warrant was constitutionally valid, the fruits of the search should not (with a few exceptions) be excluded from evidence under the exclusionary rule. On June 8, 1983, in Illinois v. Gates, the Supreme Court, after calling for and receiving briefs and arguments on the same issue of whether the exclusionary rule should be modified, concluded, for reasons of …

Historical Truth, Narrative Truth, And Expert Testimony, Marianne Wesson

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination In A Rescue Situation, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.

Book Review Of Passion: An Essay On Personality , Richard F. Devlin Frsc

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Passion is a cogently structured, compel Jingly argued and seductively enthralling masterpiece which, in years to come, will undoubtedly stand out as an inspirational source for many who seek social transformation. Unger's style, in this essay at least, is lucid and inviting. Substantively, Passion demonstrates not only the depth of his penetrating intellect but also his command of an array of' disciplines. Unger's polymathy is all the more impressive when we remember that ours is an era in which idiosyncratic specialization is the norm.

Cross-Racial Identification Errors In Criminal Cases, Sheri Johnson

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Use Of Suppression Hearing Testimony To Impeach, Morgan G. Graham

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Hypnotically Refreshed Testimony: In Support Of The Emerging Majority And People V. Hughes, Paul G. Harnisch

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Introduction: Trends And Developments With Respect To That Amendment 'Central To Enjoyment Of Other Guarantees Of The Bill Of Rights', Yale Kamisar

Articles

Seventy years ago, in the famous Weeks case,' the Supreme Court evoked a storm of controversy by promulgating the federal exclusionary rule. When, a half-century later, in the landmark Mapp case,2 the Court extended the Weeks rule to state criminal proceedings, at least one experienced observer assumed that the controversy "today finds its end." 3 But as we all know now, Mapp only intensified the controversy. Indeed, in recent years spirited debates over proposals to modify the exclusionary rule or to scrap it entirely have filled the air - and the law reviews.'

Mary Beth G. V. City Of Chicago: How Reasonable Can A Strip Search Be, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 237 (1984), Frank C. Lipuma

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

New Hearsay Exceptions For A Child's Statement Of Sexual Abuse, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (1984), Glen Skoler

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Admissibility Of Prior-Action Depositions And Formertestimony Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(A)(4) Andfed. R. Evid. 804(B)(1): Courts Differinginterpretations, J. Randall Coffey

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Federal Coconspirator Exception: Action, Assertion, And Hearsay, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Rethinking Self-Incrimination In Great Britain, Mark Berger

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

Winfield V. Commonwealth: The Application Of The Virginia Rape Shield Statute, Philip L. Hatchett

University of Richmond Law Review

In Winfield v. Commonwealth, the Virginia Supreme Court held that the state's recently enacted rape shield statute could not restrict or infringe upon the defendant's sixth amendment right under the United States Constitution to confront his accusers. In overruling the trial judge, the court stated that section 18.2-67.7 of the Code of Virginia actually expanded the admissibility of evidence related to specific prior sexual conduct of the prosecutrix. By this ruling, Virginia has joined a minority of jurisdictions which have refused to recognize the special dilemma of the prosecutrix in a rape trial and to grant additional protections under her …

Gates, 'Probable Cause', 'Good Faith', And Beyond, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Illinois v. Gates1 was the most eagerly awaited constitutional-criminal procedure case of the 1982 Term. I think it fair to say, however, that it was awaited a good deal more eagerly by law enforcement officials and the Americans for Effective Law Enforcement than by defense lawyers and the American Civil Liberties Union. As it turned out, of course, the Gates Court, to the disappointment of many, did not reach the question whether the exclusionary rule in search and seizure cases should be modified so as not to require the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of the fourth amendment when …

Evidence: Survey Of Recent Developments In Indiana Law, J. Alexander Tanford

Articles by Maurer Faculty

With rare exceptions, Indiana evidence law progresses slowly and holds closely to the traditional concepts of the common law. This Survey Article collects the several important cases decided during the past year that continue this development of Indiana's common law of evidence. A general word of caution is in order concerning the Indiana appellate courts' evidence cases. Most evidence issues arise in criminal cases, in which convicted defendants allege error in the admission of evidence against them or in the exclusion of evidence offered in their defense. A ruling in favor of the defendant could result in the reversal of …

Evidence In Capital Cases, John Kaplan

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Government Compensation For The Costs Of Producting Subpoenaed Documents: A Proposal For Legislative Reform, Norman Gross

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Current statutory and case law provide for the compensation of select categories of persons and entities that provide evidence to the federal government. This compensation scheme is inequitable insofar as it treats similarly situated persons and entities dissimilarly. This Note advocates the adoption of a blanket statutory provision to compensate all third party custodians for incurred costs in producing documents in compliance with a subpoena duces tecum issued on behalf of a federal authority. Part I describes the current federal reimbursement scheme. Part II examines the inequities that the current statutory scheme imposes upon similarly situated entities and argues for …

The Fourth Amendment As A Device For Protecting The Innocent, Arnold H. Loewy

Michigan Law Review

Part I of this Article establishes that the government has a right to search for and seize evidence of crime. Part II develops the corollary proposition that the fourth amendment does not protect the right to secrete evidence of crime. Part III explores the impact of the reasonable expectation of privacy concept on the innocent. Part IV evaluates consent searches and their effect on the innocent. Finally, Part V considers the exclusionary rule as a device for protecting the innocent.

Good Faith, The Exclusionary Remedy, And Rule-Oriented Adjudication In The Criminal Process, Gerald G. Ashdown

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.