Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Procedure (200)
- Constitutional Law (198)
- Courts (130)
- Criminal Law (127)
- Supreme Court of the United States (103)
-
- Torts (91)
- Contracts (87)
- Litigation (87)
- Estates and Trusts (81)
- Property Law and Real Estate (75)
- Civil Procedure (72)
- Insurance Law (72)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (70)
- Bankruptcy Law (63)
- Banking and Finance Law (60)
- Family Law (51)
- Fourth Amendment (51)
- State and Local Government Law (49)
- Transportation Law (42)
- Labor and Employment Law (33)
- Securities Law (33)
- Medical Jurisprudence (32)
- Jurisdiction (31)
- Commercial Law (29)
- Science and Technology Law (27)
- Common Law (25)
- Juvenile Law (25)
- Legislation (25)
- Keyword
-
- Testimony (129)
- Witnesses (115)
- Admissibility (110)
- United States Supreme Court (86)
- Sixth Amendment (63)
-
- Hearsay (59)
- Confrontation Clause (52)
- Police (51)
- Trials (51)
- Cross-examination (45)
- Juries (41)
- Law reform (39)
- Crawford v. Washington (37)
- Confessions (34)
- Discovery (32)
- Reliability (32)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (31)
- Fifth Amendment (29)
- Exclusionary rule (28)
- Expert evidence (27)
- Searches (27)
- Negligence (25)
- Seizures (24)
- Custodial interrogations (23)
- Miranda v. Arizona (23)
- Due process (22)
- Michigan (22)
- Exclusions (20)
- Probability (20)
- Probative value (20)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (542)
- Articles (156)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (59)
- Book Chapters (24)
- Michigan Journal of International Law (13)
-
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (10)
- Other Publications (8)
- Reviews (6)
- Appellate Briefs (5)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (4)
- Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review (4)
- Michigan Journal of Gender & Law (3)
- Books (2)
- Event Materials (1)
- Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law (1)
- Michigan Legal Studies Series (1)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 271 - 300 of 840
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Confusing The Fifth Amendment With The Sixth: Lower Court Misapplication Of The Innis Definition Of Interrogation, Jonathan L. Marks
Confusing The Fifth Amendment With The Sixth: Lower Court Misapplication Of The Innis Definition Of Interrogation, Jonathan L. Marks
Michigan Law Review
This Note examines how these courts have applied or misapplied Innis, and concludes that, while many of these decisions are consistent with Miranda and Innis, too many others are not. In order to evaluate these cases, it is first necessary to understand the meaning and significance of Innis. Part I thus considers Innis and its background. Part II then examines lower court decisions applying the Innis test, dividing these decisions into six groups based on the most common factual scenarios. Because the cases deal with factually specific police practices, this method constitutes the most useful way to …
Police-Obtained Evidence And The Constitution: Distinguishing Unconstitutionally Obtained Evidence From Unconstitutionally Used Evidence, Arnold H. Loewy
Police-Obtained Evidence And The Constitution: Distinguishing Unconstitutionally Obtained Evidence From Unconstitutionally Used Evidence, Arnold H. Loewy
Michigan Law Review
The article will consider four different types of police-obtained evidence: evidence obtained from an unconstitutional search and seizure, evidence obtained from a Miranda violation, confessions and lineup identifications obtained in violation of the sixth amendment right to counsel, and coerced confessions. My conclusions are that evidence obtained from an unconstitutional search and seizure is excluded because of the police misconduct by which it was obtained. On the other hand, evidence obtained from a Miranda violation is (or ought to be) excluded because use of that evidence compromises the defendant's procedural right not to be compelled to be a witness against …
Hot Air In The Redwoods, A Sequel To The Wind In The Willows, William Twining
Hot Air In The Redwoods, A Sequel To The Wind In The Willows, William Twining
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Hot Air in the Redwoods by Kenneth Graham, Jr.
Prejudice, Politics, And Proof, Peter Tillers
Prejudice, Politics, And Proof, Peter Tillers
Michigan Law Review
In the last fifteen years there has been a great resurgence of interest in fundamental theoretical analysis of the nature of factual proof in litigation. Many serious scholars, both in the law school world and outside it, have turned their energies in this direction. William L. Twining, Quain Professor of Jurisprudence at University College London, has been a major figure in this growing movement. He recently published a painstaking and scholarly study of Bentham's and Wigmore's theories of evidence, inference, and proof in adjudication. This book is part of Twining's broader, long-term effort to develop a general theoretical framework for …
Rape Shield Laws--Is It Time For Reinforcement?, Catherine L. Kello
Rape Shield Laws--Is It Time For Reinforcement?, Catherine L. Kello
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Note takes a critical look at civil suits arising from allegations of rape, particularly from the perspective of how these actions run counter to the spirit of rape reform and rape shield legislation. The analysis begins with a brief history of the Rape Shield Law and its intended purposes. Part II then utilizes two cases to outline the current dilemma posed by civil suits that are filed during a pending criminal sexual conduct prosecution. After presenting these cases, Part III considers whether a legislative remedy is required and determines that it is. Part IV then proposes a Model Statute. …
A Subject Matter Approach To Hearsay Reform, Roger Park
A Subject Matter Approach To Hearsay Reform, Roger Park
Michigan Law Review
None of the three major reform proposals - the Model Code, the Uniform Rules, or the original Federal Rules - incorporated a systematic distinction between civil and criminal cases. The thesis of this article is that this distinction should be adopted. This article will explore the reasons for excluding hearsay, and conclude that they support different sets of rules in civil and criminal cases. In civil cases, rules excluding hearsay should be curtailed. Hearsay that fits under an established exception should be admitted, and other hearsay, without discretionary screening by the trial judge, should be admitted on proper notice. In …
'Comparative Reprehensibility' And The Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
'Comparative Reprehensibility' And The Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar
Articles
It is not . . . easy to see what the shock-the-conscience test adds, or should be allowed to add, to the deterrent function of exclusionary rules. Where no deterrence of unconstitutional police behavior is possible, a decision to exclude probative evidence with the result that a criminal goes free to prey upon the public should shock the judicial conscience even more than admitting the evidence. So spoke Judge Robert H. Bork, concurring in a ruling that the fourth amendment exclusionary rule does not apply to foreign searches conducted exclusively by foreign officials. A short time thereafter, when an interviewer …
The Ultimate Violation, Todd Maybrown
The Ultimate Violation, Todd Maybrown
Michigan Law Review
A Review of The Ultimate Violation by Judith Rowland
"There'll Always Be An England": The Instrumental Ideology Of Evidence, Kenneth W. Graham Jr.
"There'll Always Be An England": The Instrumental Ideology Of Evidence, Kenneth W. Graham Jr.
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Theories of Evidence: Bentham and Wigmore by William Twining
Videotaping Children's Testimony: An Empirical View, Paula E. Hill, Samuel M. Hill
Videotaping Children's Testimony: An Empirical View, Paula E. Hill, Samuel M. Hill
Michigan Law Review
Increases in the number of reported incidents of child abuse and sexual molestation have resulted in more and younger children becoming courtroom participants. Some courts refuse to consider the special needs of the child in this adversarial environment. Relying on questionable precedent, these courts hold that the defendant's right to directly confront the child, as well as strict compliance with evidentiary rules, overrides that child's interest in freedom from embarrassment or psychological trauma. This Note focuses on pressures felt by the testifying child and the ways in which these pressures affect her testimony; it then proposes using videotaped testimony as …
Edward L. Barrett, Jr.: The Critic With 'That Quality Of Judiciousness Demanded Of The Court Itself', Yale Kamisar
Edward L. Barrett, Jr.: The Critic With 'That Quality Of Judiciousness Demanded Of The Court Itself', Yale Kamisar
Articles
Barrett was as talented and as dedicated a law teacher as any of his distinguished (or soon-to-become-distinguished) contemporaries. But Barrett resisted the movement toward new rights in fields where none had existed before. At least, he was quite uneasy about the trend. To be sure, others in law teaching shared Barrett's concern that the clock was spinning too fast. Indeed, some others were quite vociferous about it.' But because his criticism was cerebral rather than emotional - because he fairly stated and fully explored the arguments urging the courts to increase their tempo in developing constitutional rights - Barrett was …
Loss Of Innocence: Eyewitness Identification And Proof Of Guilt, Samuel R. Gross
Loss Of Innocence: Eyewitness Identification And Proof Of Guilt, Samuel R. Gross
Articles
It is no news that eyewitness identification in criminal cases is a problem; it is an old and famous problem. Judges and lawyers have long known that the identification of strangers is a chancy matter, and nearly a century of psychological research has confirmed this skeptical view. In 1967 the Supreme Court attempted to mitigate the problem by regulating the use of eyewitness identification evidence in criminal trials; since then it has retreated part way from that effort. Legal scholars have written a small library of books and articles on this problem, the courts' response to it, and various proposed …
18 U.S.C. § 3501 And The Admissibility Of Confessions Obtained During Unnecessary Prearraignment Delay, Matthew W. Frank
18 U.S.C. § 3501 And The Admissibility Of Confessions Obtained During Unnecessary Prearraignment Delay, Matthew W. Frank
Michigan Law Review
Part I thus argues that the admissibility of post-sixth-hour confessions is governed by Mallory, under which a voluntary confession is inadmissible if, but only if, it follows a period of unnecessary delay. Part II addresses a possible objection to this conclusion - namely, that, with limited exceptions, subsection 350l(c) renders all post-sixth hour confessions inadmissible without regard to the reasonableness of the prearraignment delay. This interpretation is derived by negative implication from the proviso in subsection 350l(c) and would require courts to suppress confessions even though there has been no unnecessary delay, and even though the confessions would be …
The Perils Of Privilege: Waiver And The Litigator, Richard L. Marcus
The Perils Of Privilege: Waiver And The Litigator, Richard L. Marcus
Michigan Law Review
Waiver can be made less tricky, although it will never yield algebraic accuracy. Focusing on civil litigation, this article develops a framework for waiver decisions. It begins by stressing a factor that others have neglected - the costs generated by broad traditional waiver rules. These costs result largely from changes in lawyer behavior to reduce waiver risks. Thus, enormous energy can be expended to guarantee that privileged materials are not inadvertently revealed in discovery, and lawyers may adopt elaborate witness preparation strategies in order to prevent witnesses from seeing privileged materials. Judges also feel the burden; where waiver is at …
Interlocutory Appeal Of Preindictment Suppression Motions Under Rule 41 ( E ), Clifford A. Godiner
Interlocutory Appeal Of Preindictment Suppression Motions Under Rule 41 ( E ), Clifford A. Godiner
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that preindictment rulings denying 41(e) motions are not immediately appealable. Part I discusses decisions that mandate dismissal of such appeals for want of jurisdiction. Part II examines the policy rationales behind these precedents. Finally, Part III argues that an adequate remedy exists outside of rule 41(e), rendering immediate appellate review of rulings on 41(e) motions unnecessary.
The New Evidence Scholarship: Analyzing The Process Of Proof, Richard O. Lempert
The New Evidence Scholarship: Analyzing The Process Of Proof, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
When I began teaching evidence seventeen years ago, the field was moribund. The great systematizers of the common law-Wigmore, Maguire, McCormick, Morgan and their ilk-had come and, if they had not all already gone, their work was largely finished. Not only was most of what passed for evidence scholarship barely worth the reading-the same, after all, could be said of many fields of law at most times-but disregarding student work, few scholars were writing regularly on evidentiary matters.
Compulsory Process, Right To, Peter K. Westen
Compulsory Process, Right To, Peter K. Westen
Book Chapters
The first state to adopt a constitution following the Declaration of Independence (New Jersey, 1776) guaranteed all criminal defendants the same ‘‘privileges of witnesses’’ as their prosecutors. Fifteen years later, in enumerating the constitutional rights of accused persons, the framers of the federal Bill of Rights bifurcated what New Jersey called the ‘‘privileges of witnesses’’ into two distinct but related rights: the Sixth Amendment right of the accused ‘‘to be confronted with the witnesses against him,’’ and his companion Sixth Amendment right to ‘‘compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor.’’ The distinction between witnesses ‘‘against’’ the accused and witnesses …
Hearsay Rule, Peter K. Westen
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.
I Cannot Tell A Lie: The Standard For New Trial In False Testimony Cases, Daniel Wolf
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 …
Statistics In The Courtroom: Building On Rubinfeld, Richard O. Lempert
Statistics In The Courtroom: Building On Rubinfeld, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
As the use of statistics in litigation has burgeoned and as more complicated statistical techniques have entered the courtroom, concern for the way courts use statistics has mounted and efforts to instruct lawyers and judges on the wise use of statistics have begun. Professor Rubinfeld's paper is a contribution toward this end. Two ideas at the core of this paper are particularly important if we are to develop a more satisfactory approach to the use of statistics in the courtroom. The first is Professor Rubinfeld's caution against the talismanic use of the .05 level of significances as a test of …
The Admissibility Of Prior Silence To Impeach The Testimony Of Criminal Defendants, Rex A. Sharp
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 …
The Hague Convention On Taking Evidence Abroad: Conflict Over Pretrial Discovery, Margaret T. Burns
The Hague Convention On Taking Evidence Abroad: Conflict Over Pretrial Discovery, Margaret T. Burns
Michigan Journal of International Law
This note asserts that the Hague Convention is not the exclusive vehicle available to U.S. litigants for taking evidence abroad. It argues that in certain circumstances, U.S. courts should allow litigants to use the more liberal methods of the Federal Rules when seeking evidence from party litigants in other signatory nations.
Preparation Of The Multistate Bar Examination: One Drafting Committee's Perspective, John W. Reed
Preparation Of The Multistate Bar Examination: One Drafting Committee's Perspective, John W. Reed
Articles
One who wants to know how the Multistate Bar Examination is created should begin by learning how the drafting committees work. My assignment is to describe the work of one of those committees: the Evidence Committee. Though there are differences among the six committees, they mostly are ones of style, and to learn how to operate in the evidence group is to understand the process generally.
The Self-Critical Analysis Privilege And Discovery Of Affirmative Action Plans In Title Vii Suits, Michigan Law Review
The Self-Critical Analysis Privilege And Discovery Of Affirmative Action Plans In Title Vii Suits, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that plaintiffs should have access to affirmative action plans in discovery. Part I describes the "self-critical analysis" or "self-evaluative" privilege that employers have advanced to block discovery of such plans. Part II examines the conflicting interests of society, employers and employees in allowing or denying discovery. Part III evaluates the application of a self-critical analysis privilege in light of these conflicting interests and concludes that the privilege should not be applied to affirmative action plans.
The Battering Parent Syndrome: Inexpert Testimony As Character Evidence, Thomas N. Bulleit Jr.
The Battering Parent Syndrome: Inexpert Testimony As Character Evidence, Thomas N. Bulleit Jr.
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Note proposes that courts refuse to give further consideration to admitting the battering parent syndrome as evidence in both civil and criminal proceedings arising out of child abuse. Part I of the Note describes the syndrome as it appears in the psychological literature. Part II suggests that current judicial attitudes favor the future admissibility of the syndrome, conditioned only on an improved showing of scientific accuracy. Part III demonstrates that regardless of scientific accuracy, the character evidence rule forbids courts from admitting the battering parent syndrome. Part IV argues that the important policies underlying the character evidence rule override …
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.'
Gates, 'Probable Cause', 'Good Faith', And Beyond, Yale Kamisar
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 …
Government Compensation For The Costs Of Producting Subpoenaed Documents: A Proposal For Legislative Reform, Norman Gross
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
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.
Forgotten Points In The "Exclusionary Rule" Debate, James Boyd White
Forgotten Points In The "Exclusionary Rule" Debate, James Boyd White
Michigan Law Review
Most contemporary discussions of the "exclusionary rule" assume or assert that this "rule" is not part of the fourth amendment, nor required by its terms, but is rather a judicial "remedy" that was fashioned to protect those rights (against unreasonable search and seizure) that actually are granted by the fourth amendment. The protection is said to work by "deterring" official violations; this is, however, an odd use of the word, for the rule does not punish violations but merely deprives the government of some of the benefits that might ensue from them, namely the use in the criminal case of …