Evidence Commons^™

Misuse Of Scientific Evidence By Prosecutors, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The prosecutor's misuse of scientific evidence to charge and convict has not been sufficiently examined. Courts and commentators critiquing abuses of scientific evidence in criminal cases rarely focus on the prosecutor's role in the process. Issues typically discussed are the questionable nature of the evidence, the controversial manner in which the evidence was acquired and tested, whether the expert arrived at her conclusions in a scientifically reliable manner, and whether the expert's courtroom testimony was false or misleading. The prosecutor's control over and manipulation of the scientific evidence to shape the fact-finder's evaluation of the facts and to persuade the …

Tracking The Circulatory Of Confession Jurisprudence After Massiah & (And) Miranda: Can A Superficial Application Of Property Law Make Sense Out Of Nonsense?, Rory Bahadur

St. Thomas Law Review

After Miranda v. Arizona and Massiah v. United States, there were arguably three doctrinally separate methodologies for determining the admissibility of confessions in criminal proceedings. The interaction of these three doctrines has generated a complex, contradictory, somewhat inexplicable, and chaotic jurisprudence. This paper re-examines the post- Miranda interaction of the three doctrines, and argues that basic property law provides a conceptual framework for reconciling what appears to be an otherwise arbitrary and unpalatable collection of Supreme Court decisions. Section one briefly examines the totality of the circumstances test and the Miranda and Massiah decisions themselves, not from the standpoint of …

Evidence Teaching Wisdom: A Survey, Calvin William Sharpe

Seattle University Law Review

This Survey secures data on the methods American law school faculty use to teach the law of evidence. The Survey provides insight into the teaching of evidence and facilitates discourse among evidence faculty on how we teach the course, for the benefit of new or occasional instructors as well as veterans. Specifically, the Survey focuses on the question of which classroom instruction approach predominates among evidence professors.

Peer Dialogue: The Quagmire Of Scientific Expert Testimony: Crumping The Supreme Court's Style, Paul Rice

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Fifteen Years After The Federal Sentencing Revolution: How Mandatory Minimums Have Undermined Effective And Just Narcotics Sentencing Perspectives On The Federal Sentencing Guidelines And Mandatory Sentencing, Ian Weinstein

Faculty Scholarship

Federal criminal sentencing has changed dramatically since 1988. Fifteen years ago, judges determined if and for how long a defendant would go to jail. Since that time, changes in substantive federal criminal statutes, particularly the passage of an array of mandatory minimum penalties and the adoption of the federal sentencing guidelines, have limited significantly judicial sentencing power and have remade federal sentencing and federal criminal practice. The results of these changes are significantly longer federal prison sentences, as was the intent of these reforms, and the emergence of federal prosecutors as the key players in sentencing. Yet, at the same …

A Three-Dimensional Model For The Use Of Expert Psychiatric And Psychological Evidence In False Confession Defenses Before The Trier Of Fact, Major Joshua E. Kastenberg

Seattle University Law Review

Part I of this Article delineates a defendant's right to present voluntariness and credibility evidence against his or her confession. This section analyzes the basic constitutional framework of how a defendant can present this evidence and describes the traditional safeguards against false confessions. This background information provides a context for the overarching issue of expert testimony admissibility. Part II provides a basic understanding of differences between the psychiatric (medical model) and psychological (social model) approach to false confessions. It then examines the types of false confession defenses used by defendants and the interrogation techniques challenged by defendants. Part III reviews …

Constructing Products Liability: Reforms In Theory And Procedure, Frank J. Vandall

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Of Course We Believe You, But - The Third Circuit's Position On Corroboration Of Credible Testimony, Brian P. Downey, Angelo, A. Stio Iii

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

A Unilateral Hope: Reliance On The Clemency Process As A Trigger For A Right Of Access To State-Held Dna Evidence, Ryan Dietrich

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Some Steps Between Attitudes And Verdicts, Phoebe C. Ellsworth

Book Chapters

Most research that has attempted to predict verdict preferences on the basis of stable juror characteristics, such as attitudes and personality traits, has found that individual differences among jurors are not very useful predictors, accounting for only a small proportion of the variance in verdict choices. Some commentators have therefore concluded that verdicts are overwhelmingly accounted for by "the weight of the evidence," and that differences among jurors have negligible effects. But there is a paradox here: In most cases the weight of the evidence is insufficient to produce firstballot unanimity in the jury (Hans & Vidmar, 1986; Hastie, Penrod, …

Daubert On A Tilted Playing Field, Roger C. Park

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Revoking Our Privileges: Federal Law Enforcement's Multi-Front Assault On The Attorney-Client Privilege (And Why It Is Misguided), Lance Cole

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Eyewitness Identification: Expert Witnesses Are Not The Only Solution, Roger C. Park

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Meyer V. State, 119 Nev. Adv. Rep. 61, Timothy W. Roehrs

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

“The right to trial by jury, if it is to mean anything, must mean the right to a fair and impartial jury. A litigant is therefore entitled to a jury composed of 12 impartial jurors; …a party has the right to have that decision, whether for or against him, based on the honest deliberations of 12 such individuals.”2 The legitimacy of our justice system hinges on the fact that the results of trials, as dictated by a jury of one’s peers, remain free from the taint of extrinsic evidence and are grounded solely on the evidence presented by the parties …

The Capital Jury And Empathy: The Problem Of Worthy And Unworthy Victims, Scott E. Sundby

Articles

No abstract provided.

Trials And Tribulations: Science In The Law, Susan Haack

Articles

No abstract provided.

Dna Identification Databases: Legality, Legitimacy, And The Case For Population-Wide Coverage, David H. Kaye, Michael E. Smith

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past decade, law enforcement authorities have amassed huge collections of DNA samples and the identifying profiles derived from them. Large DNA databanks routinely help to identify the guilty and to exonerate the innocent, but as the databanks grow, so do fears about civil liberties. Perhaps the most controversial policy issue in the creation of these databases is the question of coverage: Whose DNA profiles should be stored in them? The possibilities extend from convicted violent sex offenders to all convicted felons, to everyone arrested, to the entire population. This Article questions the rationales for drawing the line at …

Reliability And The Admissibility Of Experts, Dale A. Nance

Faculty Publications

Modern law on expert testimony insists, as a condition of admissibility, that the asserted expertise be determined by the trial judge to be reliable. Reliability is usually characterized as a dichotomous attribute of evidence, as if expertise were either reliable or unreliable. This article argues that making progress in the development of meaningful and appropriate restrictions on the admissibility of expert testimony requires that we abandon this conceptualization and understand the implications of endorsing a gradational notion of reliability in which evidence can be more or less reliable and in which a comparative assessment of reliability is prominent. Consistent with …

Danger At The Edge Of Chaos: Predicting Violent Behavior In A Post-Daubert World, Erica Beecher-Monas, Edgar Garcia-Ril

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

The Epistemology Of Prediction: Future Dangerousness Testimony And Intellectual Due Process, Erica Beecher-Monas

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Speeding In Reverse: An Anecdotal View Of Why Victim Impact Testimony Should Not Be Driving Capital Prosecutions, Sheri Johnson

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Miranda's Demise, Steven D. Clymer

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Miranda v. Arizona has been a prominent fixture of the American criminal justice system, as well as police television shows and movies, for more than a third of a century. And when, amid considerable fanfare, the Supreme Court in June 2000 announced its decision in Dickerson v. United States, it appeared that Miranda would retain that status for the foreseeable future. In Dickerson, a surprisingly large 7–2 majority settled a long-standing debate about the constitutional legitimacy of Miranda, holding that the Miranda rules are firmly grounded in the Fifth Amendment’s self-incrimination clause.

But now, a mere three …

Forfeiture By Wrongdoing And Those Who Acquiesce In Witness Intimidation: A Reach Exceeding Its Grasp And Other Problems With Federal Rule Of Evidence 804(B)(6), James F. Flanagan

Faculty Publications

This article is the first comprehensive and critical analysis of the new exception to the hearsay rule that permits prosecutors to admit hearsay statements of absent witnesses when the defendant causes their unavailability at trial. The article develops the problems with the rule's overbroad language, its potential to admit unreliable hearsay and its relationship to the Confrontation Clause. These issues are of increasing interest to lawyers, judges and justices now that it is a federal rule and been adopted by ten states.

The first section is a comprehensive statement of the rule as now applied. The exception is traced from …

Sometimes What Everybody Thinks They Know Is True, Richard D. Friedman, Roger C. Park

Articles

This essay responds to D. Davis and W. C. Follette (2002), who question the value of motive evidence in murder cases. They argue that the evidence that a husband had extramartial affairs, that he heavily insured his wife's life, or that he battered his wife is ordinarily of infinitesimal probative value. We disagree. To be sure, it would be foolish to predict solely on the basis of such evidence that a husband will murder his wife. However, when this kind of evidence is cobmined with other evidence in a realistic murder case, the evidence can be quite probative. We analyze …

Crawford V. Washington, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

On June 9, by granting certiorari in Crawford v. Washington, 02-9410, the Supreme Court signaled its intention to enter once again into the realm of the Confrontation Clause, in which it has found itself deeply perplexed. This time there was a difference, however, because the grant indicated that the Court might be willing to rethink its jurisprudence in this area. Crawford, like Lee v. Illinois, 476 U.S. 530 (1986), and Lilly v. Virginia, 527 U.S. 116 (1999), presents a classic case of what might be called station-house testimony. Michael Crawford was accused of stabbing another man. His wife, Sylvia, was …

Minimizing The Jury Over-Valuation Concern (Visions Of Rationality In Evidence Law Symposium), Richard D. Friedman

Articles

A great deal of the rhetoric of evidence discourse concerns the supposed cognitive inadequacies of the jury. In various contexts we are told that although an item of evidence is probative, it must be excluded because the jury will give it too much weight. I believe this approach has played far too great a role in evidentiary law, and that it is an interesting project to see whether we can construct a satisfactory body of law without relying at all on the cognitive inadequacy argument. I think that, at least to a large extent, we can. In some settings, where …

Ohio's Patient-Physician Privilege: Whether Planned Parenthood Is A Protected Party, Melissa O'Neill

Journal of Law and Health

This article will suggest that under Ohio's patient-physician privilege, the results of pregnancy tests that are administered at Planned Parenthood clinics will not be considered privileged or confidential information, unless the test is administered by a physician and is later used by a physician in treatment of the woman. In particular, this article will briefly examine the history of a right to medical privacy, the development of the patient-physician privilege and the origin of Planned Parenthood . The notion of very intimate details of a person's health, including diseases, conditions, diagnoses and prognoses being readily available to whoever would like …

Wrongful Convictions And The Accuracy Of The Criminal Justice System, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

No abstract provided.

Evidence: Is Oklahoma Balancing The Scales Of Justice By Tying The Hands Of Trial Judges?: The 2002 Amendment To Section 2403 Of The Oklahoma Evidence Code Mandating Admission Of In-Life Victim Photographs In Homicide Cases, Liesa L. Richter

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Role Of Workplace Culture Evidence In Hostile Workplace Environment Sexual Harassment Litigation: Does Title Vii Mean New Management Or Just Business As Usual?, Christopher Massaro

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.