Evidence Commons^™

Modern Evidence And The Expert Witness, Faust Rossi

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Bibbs V. Block: Standard Of Causation And Burden Of Proof In An Individual Disparate Treatment Action Under Title Vii

Washington and Lee Law Review

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 …

Confidence In Probability: Burdens Of Persuasion In A World Of Imperfect Knowledge, Neil B. Cohen

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

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

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 …

Comity And Tragedy: The Case Of Rule 407, Marcia L. Finkelstein

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Note advocates that when a Federal Rule of Evidence conflicts with a state rule, a court should examine closely the purpose of the rules in an effort to balance the competing policies of comity and procedural uniformity. Part II of this Note provides a general background on legislative and court decisions concerning federal-state conflicts. Part II also illustrates the congressional and judicial inclination to protect state substantive law. Part III dis-cusses the conflict between the Maine Rule and Federal Rule 407. Part IV suggests an approach to the general conflict between state and federal rules and applies that approach …

Closing The "Open Fields" Question: Oliver V. United States, Brian K. Jorgensen

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Symposium Proceedings, Various Editors

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

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.

Breach Of Confidence - The Need For A New Tort - Watts V. Cumberland County Hospital System, Kathryn B. Remick

Campbell Law Review

The right to redress wrongfully disclosed confidences through a separate breach of confidence tort is the topic of this Note. Not all disclosures are actionable wrongs. This Note will deal mainly with extrajudicial disclosures of customarily confidential information and will touch only superficially on testimonial privileges. This Note also will examine the inadequacies of theories advanced by many courts thus far as remedies for wrongful disclosures and the justification for the development of a separate breach of confidence tort in North Carolina.

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."

Symposium Acknowledgements, Various Editors

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Firearms And Toolmark Evidence, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Polygraph And Deception Tests: Part Ii, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Casenotes: New Trials — Juror Misconduct — Evidence — Where Motion For New Trial Is Based On Jury's Exposure To Extraneous Matter During Deliberations, Movant Must Show Probable Prejudice — Jurors' Affidavits Are Incompetent Evidence. Wernsing V. General Motors Corp., 298 Md. 406, 470 A.2d 802 (1984), Laurell Kalvan

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

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.

Editor's Preface, J. Edward Goff

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Rules Of Evidence: A Decade Later - Introduction, Leonard Packel

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Federal Rules Of Evidence In The States: A Ten-Year Perspective, L. Kinvin Wroth

Villanova Law Review

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

No abstract provided.

Casenotes: Evidence — Use Of Prior Bad Acts Not Resulting In Conviction Are Permissible For Impeachment Purposes If Probative Of Veracity And Readily Provable. State V. Cox, 298 Md. 173, 468 A.2d 319 (1983), John Jude Hathway

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Evidentiary Use Of The Hla Blood Test In Virginia, Linda L. Lemmon, Lynn K. Murphy

University of Richmond Law Review

In 1966 Virginia enacted legislation, now section 20-61.2 of the Code of Virginia, providing for the admission into evidence of the results of blood tests in cases involving questions of paternity. In 1982, a second statute, section 20-61.1 of the Code of Virginia, was amended to permit the use of genetic blood grouping tests, including the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) test, as evidence of paternity in child support proceedings. With the enactment of these two statutes, Virginia has joined a growing number of states which recognize the accuracy and reliability of the HLA test in establishing paternity.

Nix V. Williams: The Inevitable Discovery Exception To The Exclusionary Rule, Edward M. Macon

University of Richmond Law Review

In Nix v. Williams, the Supreme Court created an "inevitable discovery" exception to the exclusionary rule. This exception allows the prosecution to introduce illegally obtained evidence at trial upon a showing that such evidence would inevitably have been obtained, even without the police misconduct. The Supreme Court rejected the imposition of a second prong on the inevitable discovery exception which would have required the government to prove the absence of bad faith. The purpose of the inevitable discovery exception is to prevent the "setting aside [of] convictions that would have been obtained without police misconduct."

The Whole Truth And Nothing But The Truth: Is The Trier Of Fact Entitled To Hear It?, Joseph M. Reisman

University of Richmond Law Review

The fundamental goal of our adversarial system of litigation is to arrive at the truth through a fair presentation of the evidence. However, in a criminal proceeding material evidence is frequently not as available to the defense as it is to the prosecuting attorney. Consequently, rules have been developed which not only aid the defense in obtaining relevant information, but also assist the prosecution in fulfilling its ethical and constitutional obligations, chief among which is to see that justice and due process are upheld.

Spoliation: Civil Liability For Destruction Of Evidence, Andrea H. Rowse

University of Richmond Law Review

Intentional destruction of evidence has become a serious legal problem. Recently, the A.H. Robins Company was accused of intentionally destroying incriminating documents relevant to Dalkon Shield litigation. Even documents the court ordered to be preserved were allegedly destroyed by an attorney representing the company. The A.H. Robins Company is not the only corporation accused of intentionally destroying evidence. An attorney representing the Eastman-Kodak Company in an antitrust suit admitted that he destroyed documents relating to the litigation.

Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law, Justice Robert F. Utter

Seattle University Law Review

This Survey is designed to assist lawyers and judges who must argue and resolve search and seizure issues in Washington State. The Survey summarizes the controlling state and federal cases on search and seizure law and uses as an additional reference W. LAFAVE, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment (1978). Washington courts are likely to analyze future search and seizure issues under both the fourth amendment and Washington Constitution article I, section 7. The difference in wording between the two provisions is substantial, suggesting different degrees or types of privacy protection. This Survey summarizes the predominant treatment …

The Need To Amend Federal Rule Of Evidence 404(B): The Threat To The Future Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Edward J. Imwinkelried

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

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

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 …