Evidence Commons^™

Confronting Scientific Reports Under Crawford V. Washington, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In People v. Rawlins and People v. Meekins, the New York Court of Appeals addressed, for the first time, the admissibility of scientific reports prepared by non-testifying forensic experts for use by the prosecution in a criminal trial under the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause. Rawlins involved a fingerprint comparison report prepared by a police forensic expert, and Meekins involved a DNA profile prepared by a technician in a private laboratory. The constitutional issue in both cases was whether these reports were “testimonial” statements within the meaning of the Confrontation Clause, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Crawford v. Washington, …

Evidence Gained From Torture: Wishful Thinking, Checkability, And Extreme Circumstances, James Franklin

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article argues that while torture is morally abhorrent, its effectiveness in extracting reliable information should be evaluated separately from ethical considerations. It contends that torture can yield reliable information when the extracted details can be independently verified, challenging the common assumption that torture universally leads to false confessions. The analysis emphasizes the importance of understanding the factual reliability of torture-derived evidence before addressing its legal admissibility.

Will Quants Rule The (Legal) World?, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Professor Ian Ayres, in his new book, Super Crunchers, details the brave new world of statistical prediction and how it has already begun to affect our lives. For years, academic researchers have known about the considerable and at times surprising advantages of statistical models over the considered judgments of experienced clinicians and experts. Today, these models are emerging all over the landscape. Whether the field is wine, baseball, medicine, or consumer relations, they are vying against traditional experts for control over how we make decisions. For the legal system, the take-home of Ayres's book and the examples he describes is …

Testimonial Deficiencies And Evidentiary Uncertainties In International Criminal Trials, Nancy Amoury Combs

Faculty Publications

In this article, the author describes the flaws inherent in the process of international criminal tribunals which seek to punish the inhumane actions of dictators. The author first describes how international criminal trials confront severe impediments to accurate factfinding. It continues on to discuss the failure of witnesses in these tribunals to accurately convey the information needed to make a fully- informed decision. This problem is compounded by the fact that what clear information is provided during witness testimony often is inconsistent with the information that the witness previously provided in a pre-trial statement. The author also explores the causes …

Changing Language, Unchanging Standard: From 'Satisfied Conscience' To 'Moral Certainty' And 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt', Barbara Shapiro

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article explores the historical evolution of the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard in Anglo-American law, tracing its roots to earlier concepts such as "satisfied conscience" and "moral certainty." These ideas, influenced by Christian casuistry and Enlightenment thought, were integral to the development of legal evidence standards. The standard became a cornerstone of criminal jurisprudence, reflecting a shift from religious to secular language while maintaining a high threshold for conviction.

Absent Class Members: Are They Really Absent? The Relationship Between Absent Class Members And Class Counsel With Regards To The Attorney-Client And Work Product Privileges, Mindi Guttmann

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The note argues that absent class members in class action litigation do not have the same attorney-client or work product privileges as traditional clients due to the fundamentally different nature of their relationship with class counsel. It critiques the ambiguity in defining "client" and proposes clearer distinctions to address judicial confusion and ensure effective legal representation while protecting sensitive information.

Federal Rule Of Evidence 502: Stirring The State Law Of Privilege And Professional Responsibility With A Federal Stick, Henry S. Noyes

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Run For The Border: Laptop Searches And The Fourth Amendment, Nathan Alexander Sales

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Sealed Documents To Prevent “Perfectly Legitimate” Review And Dissemination Of Privileged Confidential Information, Bridget Hoy, Dana M. Malkus

All Faculty Scholarship

A recent federal district court case serves as a reminder that when filing documents through an electronic filing system, the information contained in the documents is immediately available to anyone “through perfectly legitimate means: by reading a public filing.” The January 6, 2009 opinion in E-Smart Technologies, Inc., et al. v. Wayne Drizin, et al., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 272 (N.D. Ca Jan. 6, 2009), demonstrates that when caution is not taken at the onset to seal documents that contain privileged or confidential information, there might be little recourse for immediate distribution of information that one might later determine …

The Proper Interpretation Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence: Insights From Article Vi, Glen Weissenberger

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reality Bites: The Illusion Of Science In Bite-Mark Evidence, Erica Beecher-Monas

Cardozo Law Review

More than a decade after Daubert, years after the amendments to the Federal Rules of Evidence, and long after the courts in Frye jurisdictions started examining the empirical basis for expert claims before permitting such testimony in their courtrooms, judges are still evading their gatekeeping duties when it comes to criminal cases. A prime example of this can be found in bite-mark testimony. Although it comes dressed in the illusion of science, having experts with advanced degrees, a fancy name (forensic odontology), professional associations, and professional journals, that illusion belies the reality that bite-mark evidence utterly lacks empirical support …

Happiness And Punishment (With J. Bronsteen & J. Masur), Christopher J. Buccafusco

All Faculty Scholarship

This article continues our project to apply groundbreaking new literature on the behavioral psychology of human happiness to some of the most deeply analyzed questions in law. Here we explain that the new psychological understandings of happiness interact in startling ways with the leading theories of criminal punishment. Punishment theorists, both retributivist and utilitarian, have failed to account for human beings' ability to adapt to changed circumstances, including fines and (surprisingly) imprisonment. At the same time, these theorists have largely ignored the severe hedonic losses brought about by the post-prison social and economic deprivations (unemployment, divorce, and disease) caused by …

Taking A Stand On Taking The Stand: The Effect Of A Prior Criminal Record On The Decision To Testify And On Trial Outcomes, Theodore Eisenberg, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This article uses unique data from over 300 criminal trials in four large counties to study the relations between the existence of a prior criminal record and defendants testifying at trial, between testifying at trial and juries' learning about a criminal record, and between juries' learning about a criminal record and their decisions to convict or acquit. Sixty percent of defendants without criminal records testified compared to 45 percent with criminal records. For testifying defendants with criminal records, juries learned of those records in about half the cases. Juries rarely learned about criminal records unless defendants testified. After controlling for …

Burden Of Proof, Prima Facie Case And Presumption In Wto Dispute Settlement, John J. Barceló Iii

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The essay maintains that the WTO Appellate Body's concepts and terminology concerning a claimant's burden of proof-the concepts of prima facie case, presumption, and burden shifting-are disturbingly ambiguous and potentially misleading. This is so whether one thinks of these terms from either a common law or a civil law perspective. In the face of the current ambiguity, a future panel might understand the AB's prima facie case concept to require an overwhelming level of proof from the claimant. On the other hand, a different panel might allow a rather weak level of claimant's proof to meet the prima facie requirement, …

The Death Of The American Trial, Robert P. Burns

Faculty Working Papers

This short essay is a summary of my assessment of the meaning of the "vanishing trial" phenomenon. It addresses the obvious question: "So what?" It first briefly reviews the evidence of the trial's decline. It then sets out the steps necessary to understand the political and social signficance of our vastly reducing the trial's importance among our modes of social ordering. The essay serves as the Introduction to a book, The Death of the American Trial, soon to be published by the University of Chicago Press.

Your Opponent Does Not Need A Friend Request To See Your Page: Social Networking Sites And Electronic Discovery, Derek S. Witte

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Revisiting The Crime-Fraud Exception To The Attorney-Client Privilege: A Proposal To Remedy The Disparity In Protections For Civil And Criminal Privilege Holders, Cary Bricker

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Irreconcilable Differences? The Troubled Marriage Of Science And Law, Susan Haack

Articles

No abstract provided.

An Indirect-Effects Model Of Mediated Adjudication: The Csi Myth, The Tech Effect, And Metropolitan Jurors' Expectations For Scientific Evidence, Hon. Donald E. Shelton, Young S. Kim, Gregg Barak

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Part I of this article defines the "CSI effect," a phrase has come to have many different meanings ascribed to it. It emphasizes the epistemological importance of first describing the effect of the "CSI effect" as observed in juror behavior documented in a new study conducted in Wayne County (Detroit), Michigan, and then looking at causative factors that may be related to an explanation of those observed effects. Part II describes the methodology of the Wayne County study, provides a descriptive analysis of Wayne County jurors, and compares the jurors demographically to the Washtenaw County jurors who were surveyed in …

Two Decades After Beech: Confusion Over The Admissibility Of Expert Opinions In Public Records, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 925 (2009), Thomas J. Mccarthy, John M. Power

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Silencing Tory Bowen: The Legal Implications Of Word Bans In Rape Trials, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 215 (2009), Randah Atassi

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Is Lying Illegal? When Should It Be? A Critical Analysis Of The Federal False Statements Act, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 111 (2009), Steven R. Morrison

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Death To Child Erotica: How Mislabeling The Evidence Can Risk Inaccuracy In The Courtroom, Mary G. Leary

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article argues that the term "child erotica" is misleading and harmful as it incorrectly implies that sexually exploitative material has artistic or social value, thereby normalizing the sexual commodification of children. It advocates for the elimination of this term and suggests replacing it with more precise labels, such as "child exploitation paraphernalia" or "child sexual exploitation images," to ensure accurate legal analysis and prevent the elevation of such material to a protected status.

Reforming The State Secrets Privilege, Amanda Frost

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

The Right Remedy For The Wrongly Convicted: Judicial Sanctions For Destruction Of Dna Evidence, Cynthia E. Jones

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Many state innocence protection statutes give courts the power to impose appropriate sanctions when biological evidence needed for postconviction DNA testing is wrongly destroyed by the government. Constitutional claims based on wrongful evidence destruction are governed by the virtually insurmountable "bad faith" standard articulated in Arizona v. Youngblood. The wrongful destruction of DNA evidence in contravention of state innocence protection laws, however, should be governed by the standards used to adjudicate other "access to evidence" violations in criminal cases, including disclosures mandated by the rules of criminal procedure, the Jencks Act, and Brady v. Maryland. Under the "access to evidence" …

Vol. Xiv, Tab 51 - Google's Objection To Evidence And Motion To Strike, Google

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

"False But Highly Persuasive": How Wrong Were The Probability Estimates In Mcdaniel V. Brown?, David H. Kaye

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

In McDaniel v. Brown, the Supreme Court will review the use of DNA evidence in a 1994 trial for sexual assault and attempted murder. The Court granted certiorari to consider two procedural issues—the standard of federal postconviction review of a state jury verdict for sufficiency of the evidence, and the district court's decision to allow the prisoner to supplement the record of trials, appeals, and state postconviction proceedings with a geneticist's letter twelve years after the trial. The letter from Laurence Mueller, a professor at the University of California at Irvine, identified two obvious mistakes in the state's expert testimony. …

Wanting The Truth: Comparing Prosecutions Of Investigative And Institutional Deception, Lisa Kern Griffin

Faculty Scholarship

Defensive dishonesty in criminal investigations has increasingly been prosecuted without standards for identifying harmful deception or other meaningful checks on prosecutorial discretion. Although they are often grouped together statistically and evaluated as comparable crimes, there is a clear distinction between investigative lies and in-court perjury. The differences between the offenses—including the standards for prosecution, the perceived victim, and the purposes of bringing charges—suggest reasons to reconsider the current approach to investigative lies such as false statements. More truth is produced, and arguably more cooperation results, when the government focuses on the quality of the information flow. The structural protections in …

The Special Threat Of Informants To The Innocent Who Are Not Innocents: Producing “First Drafts,” Recording Incentives, And Taking A Fresh Look At The Evidence, Robert P. Mosteller

Faculty Scholarship

Fabricated testimony by informants often plays an important role in convictions of the innocent. In this article, I examine the particularly problematic situation of defendants who are innocent of the particular crime charged but are not strangers to crime. As to such defendants, potential informants abound among crime associates, and they have a ready story line that authorities are preconditioned to accept. Independent proof, which could be an antidote, will predictably be lacking. Indeed, that the informant has exclusive, critical knowledge often leads the prosecution to offer particularly tempting deals.

I focus on the case of Lee Wayne Hunt, a …

Scientific Evidence And Prosecutorial Misconduct In The Duke Lacrosse Rape Case, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

The need for pretrial discovery in criminal cases is critical. A defendant's right to confrontation, effective assistance of counsel, and due process often turns on pretrial disclosure. This essay discusses a case that demonstrates this point.