Evidence Commons^™

Rethinking Self-Incrimination In Great Britain, Mark Berger

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

Records And Archives In Court, Anthony F. Sheppard

All Faculty Publications

In an increasingly litigious society, records and archives frequently become evidence in court. What are the criteria for admitting records in court as evidence, and how might records keepers be called upon to testify in court? These matters will be discussed in the context of federal and provincial law. The author's comments are directed towards these two central issues: The criteria for admitting records in court as evidence, and the status of records keepers called upon to testify in court.

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 …

United States V. Leon, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Bose Corp. V. Consumers Union Of United States, Inc., Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Legal Psychology: Eyewitness Testimony--Jury Behavior, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Legal Psychology: Eyewitness Testimony--Jury Behavior by L. Craig Parker

Watching The Judiciary Watch The Police, Jon O. Newman

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Police Practices and the Law: Essays from the Michigan Law ReviewThe University of Michigan Press

The Quantum Of Evidence Required To Extradite From The United States, Robert J. Rosoff

Michigan Journal of International Law

This article argues that it is appropriate to require that requesting countries meet the uniform federal bindover standard to obtain extradition from the United States, rather than a more stringent state standard. The federal bindover standard of probable cause accomplishes the purpose of United States extradition procedure better than any other evidentiary standard. It affords an alleged fugitive more protection from unjustified extradition than is available in most countries. Furthermore, the reasons advanced by advocates of a more stringent bindover standard in the domestic criminal setting do not apply to extradition hearings.

Confessions, Yale Kamisar

Book Chapters

The entry for 'Confessions' in the Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice, 1983

The Silent Revolution, Faust Rossi

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Statistical Implications Of Reasoning With Polygraph Evidence: Developing Instructions For The Trier Of Fact, James A. Finder

Cardozo Law Review

Report and Recommendation to the New York State Bar Association by the Committee on Federal Constitution

Civil Juries And Complex Cases: Let's Not Rush To Judgment, Richard O. Lempert

Michigan Law Review

When a fundamental constitutional right is at issue, it is admittedly difficult for the Court to treat the lower courts as laboratories. But if the constitutional right turns on empirical questions, it is better to wait for knowledge than to rush toward a judgment that may later be shown to have vitiated an important right across all circuits. If the Court feels compelled to resolve the conflict, the better decision - if empirical issues are seen as central - is to sustain the right to jury trial regardless of complexity. Sustaining that right will allow courts and researchers to collect …

United States V. Payner--Constriction Of The Federal Courts' Supervisory Power, Mary Rich Lewis

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States Of America V. Herman Raddatz, Preview Of United States Supreme Court Cases, Leroy Pernell

Journal Publications

No abstract provided.

Parent-Child Privilege: Constitutional Right Or Specious Analogy?, Donald Cofer

Seattle University Law Review

To avoid reaching incorrect verdicts as a result of insufficient evidence, courts generally require witnesses to testify to all relevant facts within their knowledge. Two important exceptions to this general rule, incompetency and privilege, rest on very different rationales. Developed at common law to exclude unreliable evidence, rules of competency disqualify certain untrustworthy witnesses from testifying. To promote extrinsic public policies, however, privileges excuse competent witnesses from providing what may be highly probative and reliable evidence. In the past decade there have been calls for legislative or judicial recognition of a parent-child privilege, similar to the marital privilege, that would …

A Defense Of The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar

Articles

The exclusionary rule is being flayed with increasing vigor by a number of unrelated sources and with a variety of arguments. Some critics find it unworkable and resort to empirically based arguments. Others see it as the product of a belated and unwarranted judicial interpretation. Still others, uncertain whether the rule works, are confident that in some fashion law enforcement's hands are tied. Professor Yale Kamisar, long a defender of the exclusionary rule, reviews the current attacks on the rule and offers a vigorous rebuttal. He finds it difficult to accept that there is a line for acceptable police conduct …

The Proposed Federal Rules Of Evidence: Of Privileges And The Division Of Rule-Making Power, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note proposes that the lower federal courts accord the same binding authority to the Proposed Rules that they give those judicially promulgated procedural rules, such as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that have been implicitly approved by Congress.

Part I of the Note analyzes the constitutional division of the rule-making power by examining both the policy considerations involved and the relevant constitutional language and doctrines. That examination indicates that the power to establish such rules is shared by Congress and the Supreme Court. To determine when that power is appropriately exercised by one branch rather than the other, …

Jurors' Impeachment Of Verdicts And Indictments In Federal Court Under Rule 606(B), Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Prior Consistent Statements, Arthur H. Travers Jr.

Publications

No abstract provided.

Effects Of Corroboration Instructions In A Rape Case On Experimental Juries, Valerie P. Hans, Neil Brooks

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The rules of evidence have evolved, in the main, to protect the jury from being misled, prejudiced or confused by certain types of evidence which might be presented to it. The rules attempt to achieve this purpose by utilizing a number of techniques, which were fashioned by common law judges. First, evidence which gives rise to these dangers might be excluded from the jury's consideration altogether. Secondly, such evidence might have to be corroborated by other evidence before the jury is permitted to reach a verdict in the case. Thirdly, the judge might be compelled to instruct the jury that …

The Chiropractor In North Carolina: Statutory Expert Witness, Benjamin G. Alford

North Carolina Central Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Reconsideration Of The Sworn Testimony Requirement: Securing Truth In The Twentieth Century, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

The purpose of this Note is relatively modest-to explore whether the traditional uncritical confidence placed in the sworn nature of testimony is justified in light of twentieth-century practice. As such, its intention is not to propose legal reforms, but rather to invite its readers to pause and reconsider a ritual too often taken for granted by the legal profession. To this end, this Note will examine the following factors influencing the character of the oath in modern times: the common-law and religious roots of the oath, the rise of nonreligious affirmation within the last century, the relationship between the oath …

Modeling Relevance, Richard O. Lempert

Michigan Law Review

During the past decade, particularly during the years immediately following the California Supreme Court's decision in People v. Collins, a number of articles have appeared suggesting ways in which jurors might use certain mathematical techniques of decision theory as aids in the rational evaluation of circumstantial evidence. Professor Tribe, in an important response to the post-Collins articles, argues against introducing these techniques into the factfinding process. Problems that Tribe foresees include the necessary imprecision of the probabilistic estimates that these techniques require, the dwarfing of soft variables by those that are more readily quantified, and the potential dehumanization …

The Second Circuit Review--1975-76 Term: Courts-- Evidence & Procedure: Commentary: The Second Circuit And The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The most significant development in federal trial procedure in recent years has been the enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence, effective July 1, 1975. In the intervening two years since the Rules became effective, the courts of the Second Circuit have bad occasion to make several illuminating applications of and references to them.

An examination of some of these decisions provides insight into the kinds of questions that are coming up not only in the Second Circuit, but around the country, and the kinds of answers that are being given. It is not the bizarre or unusual case that …

The Second Circuit And The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The most significant development in federal trial procedure in recent years has been the enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence, effective July 1, 1975. In the intervening two years since the Rules became effective, the courts of the Second Circuit have bad occasion to make several illuminating applications of and references to them.

An examination of some of these decisions provides insight into the kinds of questions that are coming up not only in the Second Circuit, but around the country, and the kinds of answers that are being given. It is not the bizarre or unusual case that …

Instructing The Jury Upon Presumptions In Civil Cases: Comparing Federal Rule 301 With Uniform Rule 301, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Foreword: Should Wyoming Adopt These Rules?, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

An Essay On The Determination Of Relevancy Under The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Arthur H. Travers Jr.

Publications

The scope of the general definition of "relevant evidence" in the Federal Rules of Evidence is ambiguous. It is unclear whether Congress, for instance, intended that certain issues be considered legislatively determined or that those issues rest within the discretion of the courts. There is also some uncertainty over the definition's applicability to several types of evidence--particularly undisputed facts such as those that provide background information or are judicially admitted.

Section 12 Of The Canada Evidence Act And The Deliberations Of Simulated Juries, Valerie P. Hans, Anthony N. Doob

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In the past, there have been three major approaches to the experimental investigation of the jury. First, juror selection research involves the study of the relation between verdicts or leniency toward certain classes of defendants and the characteristics of potential jurors. The second class of research is group study, in which the amount and style of individual participation is observed within the context of simulated jury deliberations (e.g., Strodtbeck, James and Hawkins, 1957). Finally, experimental psychology has made another contribution to the study of the jury; numerous researchers have conducted experimental studies employing legal stimulus materials. Typically, in such a …

Symposium: The Use Of Videotape In The Courtroom, Tom C. Clark

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.