Evidence Commons^™

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 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 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

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 …

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

Interview Notes Of Government Agents Under The Jencks Act, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Most courts that have considered the issue have concluded that the Jencks Act does not require the government to retain and produce rough interview notes. This Note examines the language and purpose of the Act to determine whether interview notes should be considered Jencks Act statements. Part I examines the policy underlying the Jencks Act and argues that the majority position sanctioning pre-trial destruction of interview notes conflicts with these statutory purposes. Part II discusses the statutory language and argues that the status of the witness as a government agent or a private individual determines the applicable section of the …

The Numbers Game: Statistical Inference In Discrimination Cases, David H. Kaye

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Statistical Proof of Discrimination by David Baldus and James Cole

The Use/Nonuse/Misuse Of Applied Social Research In The Courts, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Use/Nonuse/Misuse of Applied Social Research in the Courts edited by Michael J. Saks and Charles H. Baron

Discovery Of Retained Nontestifying Experts' Identities Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note proposes an approach to the problem of identification of rule 26(b)(4)(B) experts that differs from both of the approaches taken in the reported opinions. 9 Part I analyzes the language of rule 26(b) and rejects the majority approach. As a matter of statutory construction, rule 26(b )( 4)(B) governs the disclosure of the identity of nontestifying experts retained by a party in preparation for trial. Part II examines the underlying purposes of rules 26(b)(l) and 26(b)(4)(B) - to ensure adequate pretrial disclosure and to prevent unfairness in adversarial competition - and suggests that both interests may be accommodated. …

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 …

Disclosure Of Grand Jury Materials Under Clayton Act Section 4f(B), Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note analyzes the controversy and concludes that the latter courts are correct: Congress never intended to abrogate or modify rule 6(e)'s "particularized need" standard when it enacted section4F(b). Part I discusses whether Congress intended section 4F(b) to require the Attorney General to disclose grand jury materials to state attorneys general upon request, thereby abrogating rule 6(e)'s explicit prohibition against such disclosure. Part II examines the statutory language and legislative history of section). 4F(b) to determine whether Congress intended section 4F(b) to modify rule 6(e)'s "particularized need" standard. Finally, Part III evaluates the policies affected by liberalized disclosure of grand …

Psycholegal Research: Past And Present, Wallace D. Loh

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Psychology of Eyewitness Testimony by A. Daniel Yarmey, and Eyewitness Testimony by Elizabeth F. Loftus, and Social Psychology in Court by Michael J. Saks and Reid Hastie, and The Criminal Justice System and Its Psychology by Alfred Cohn and Roy Udolf

Probability Theory Meets Res Ipsa Loquitur, David Kaye

Michigan Law Review

This Article uses probability theory normatively in an effort to clarify one aspect of the famous tort doctrine known as res ipsa loquitur. It does not urge that jurors be instructed in probability theory or be equipped with microprocessors. Rather, it seeks an accurate statement of the res ipsa doctrine in ordinary language. In particular, this Article will show that the conventional formulation of the doctrine is misleading at best, and should be replaced with a more careful statement of the conditions warranting the res ipsa inference. To this end, Section I briefly surveys the legal doctrine, or, more precisely, …

The Future Of Confrontation, Peter K. Westen

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court seems to be setting the stage for a long-awaited examination of the confrontation clause. It has been ten years since the Court endeavored in Dutton v. Evans to reconcile the evidentiary rules of hearsay with the constitutional commands of confrontation. Dutton came at the tail end of a string of confrontation cases that the Court had resolved without apparent difficulty. Not surprisingly, the Court approached Dutton in the evident belief that it could resolve the constitutional problems of hearsay once and for all. Instead, after oral argument in 1969 and a rehearing in 1970, the Court found …

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, …

A Modern Approach To Evidence, Kenneth S. Brown

Michigan Law Review

A Review of A Modern Approach to Evidence by Richard O. Lempert and Stephen A. Saltzburg

Employing Inconsistent Statements For Impeachment And As Substantive Evidence: A Critical Review And Proposed Amendments Of Federal Rules Of Evidence 801 ( D ) ( 1 ) ( A ), 613, And 607, Michael H. Graham

Michigan Law Review

The Federal Rules of Evidence have already been employed as a model for the new Uniform Rules of Evidence and for several state codifications, and yet apparently none of the drafters of these schemes gave serious consideration either to expanding admissibility under 801(d)(1)(A) selectively or to controlling potential abuse regarding the use of prior inconsistent statements not substantively admissible. This Article, after exploring the history, development, and rationale of rules 801(d)(1)(A), 613, and 607, proposes that rules 613 and 607 be amended to bring their provisions into conformity with rule 801 (d) (1) (A). In the same vein, the Article …

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 …

Prohibiting Nonaccess Testimony By Spouses: Does Lord Mansfield's Rule Protect Illegitimates?, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Not surprisingly, there has been widespread disagreement concerning the validity of the policies advanced in support of Lord Mansfield's Rule and the efficacy of the rule to promote those policies. This Note assesses the validity of this rule of evidence in order to determine whether it is the most appropriate method of safeguarding the interests affected by the litigation of legitimacy. First, the historical development and justifications for Lord Mansfield's Rule are identified, and, in section II, the extent of the current acceptance of the rule in the United States is delineated. Section III analyzes traditional arguments advanced in support …

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 …

Compulsory Process Ii, Peter Westen

Michigan Law Review

This Article examines the validity of the conventional wisdom. It draws support for its analysis from the constitutional principles of compulsory process, and, in their absence, from related doctrine in the areas of a defendant's right to confront witnesses against him and his right to a fair trial. Part I of the article defines the constitutional standard that governs the simple case of a nonindigent defendant who makes a timely application to produce a witness from within the territory of the jurisdiction. Parts II through IV, in turn, examine that standard in the light of complicating factors such as the …

Constitutional Restraints On The Exclusion Of Evidence In The Defendant's Favor: The Implications Of Davis V. Alaska, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note, first, examines the Davis methodology for determining whether a foreclosed line of cross-examination warrants protection by the confrontation clause, and suggests a test employable by reviewing courts for making that determination. Then, the Note sketches the contours of the clash, prefigured by Davis, between the right of confrontation and the limitations on cross-examination that result from both the assertion of testimonial privileges and trial court relevance rulings.

The Compulsory Process Clause, Peter Westen

Michigan Law Review

Part I of this article traces the history of compulsory process, from its origin in the English transition from an inquisitional to an adversary system of procedure to its eventual adoption in the American Bill of Rights. Part II examines the Supreme Court's seminal decision in Washington v. Texas, which recognized after a century and a half of silence that the compulsory process clause was designed to enable the defendant not only to produce witnesses, but to put them on the stand and have them heard. Part III studies the implications of compulsory process for the defendant's case, from the …

Discovery And Presentation Of Evidence In Adversary And Nonadversary Proceedings, E. Allan Lind, John Thibaut, Laurens Walker

Michigan Law Review

In order to evaluate fully the advantage claimed for the adversary model we sought to add a third element that would test the hypothesis under a variety of conditions. The degree to which the evidence discovered in a case favors one party at the expense of another appeared to meet this criterion. This fact-distribution element is a pervasive condition of legal conflict resolution that, intuition suggests, may significantly influence information search and transmission. Further, this variable could be easily and accurately controlled by regulating the flow of favorable information acquired by the subjects during the experiment.

The remainder of this …

Criminal Procedure--Self-Incrimination--Harmless Error--Application Of The Harmless Error Doctrine To Violations Of Miranda: The California Experience, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Using decisions of the appellate courts of California that have applied the federal harmless error rule to violations of Miranda v. Arizona and Escobedo v. Illinois, this Note will examine the logic and effects of the California application. However, the California experience can only be understood by first briefly describing the United States Supreme Court's decisions regarding harmless constitutional error and then showing the approaches taken by other states in their application of the harmless error rule to Miranda violations. Not only will this analysis put the California experience in its proper perspective, but it will also show the …

Evidence--Privileged Communications--The Attorney-Client Privilege In The Corporate Setting: A Suggested Approach, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note will first review the development of the personal attorney-client privilege and the extent to which the term "client" has been expanded for use with that privilege. Then, the development of the corporate attorney-client privilege will be examined with an eye toward isolating the tests that the courts have used to define the extent of the term "client." Finally, with the results of these examinations in mind, an approach will be suggested that, if adopted by the courts, could effectively eliminate the confusion that presently exists with regard to the scope of the attorney-client privilege in the corporate setting.

Securing, Examining, And Cross-Examining Expert Witnesses In Environmental Cases, David Sive

Michigan Law Review

It is necessary at the outset to define the scope of the problem with which this Article will deal. Environmental cases are litigated in both judicial and administrative tribunals. The judicial proceedings include plenary actions and special proceedings and are heard in both federal and state courts. The administrative proceedings include licensing proceedings before federal agencies such as the Federal Power Commission and Atomic Energy Commission. Whether such administrative proceedings are deemed quasi-judicial or not, they are within the scope of this Article so long as they are adversary and involve testimony under oath, examination and cross-examination of witnesses, a …

Custodial Police Interrogation In Our Nation's Capital: The Attempt To Implement Miranda, Richard J. Medalie, Leonard Zeitz, Paul Alexander

Michigan Law Review

In his attempt to define the meaning of democracy, Carl Becker, looking back to Plato's view of society, observed that "[a]ll human institutions, we are told, have their ideal forms laid away in heaven, and we do not need to be told that the actual institutions conform but indifferently to these ideal counterparts." Becker's observation may well set the perspective from which to view what occurred when the attempt was made in the District of Columbia to implement the Supreme Court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona.

Federal Courts--Discovery--Stay Of Discovery In Civil Court To Protect Proceedings In Concurrent Criminal Action--The Pattern Of Remedies, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

The federal criminal discovery rules were a carefully weighed compromise between the parties' needs for information and the defendant's need for protection from inquisatorial investigation. This balance may be upset when the more liberal discovery rules in a concurrent, related civil action permit information to be obtained which is not discoverable under the criminal rules. Two recent cases, United States v. Simon and United States v. American Radiator &- Standard Sanitary Corp., illustrate the difficulty of protecting the integrity of the criminal discovery rules in such a situation.