Evidence Commons^™

Putting The Cat Back In The Bag: Involuntary Confessions And Self-Incrimination, Joseph A. Iemma

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Evidentiary Use Of Photographic Identification: Is It Time For New York To Reevaluate Its Singular Exception?, Daniela Giordano

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Yates V. United States: A Case Study In Overcriminalization, Stephen F. Smith

Journal Articles

In Yates v. United States, the Supreme Court will decide whether tossing undersized fish overboard can be prosecuted under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, a law aimed at preventing massive frauds of the sort that led to the collapse of Enron and sent shock waves throughout the economy. Although the legal issue is narrow, the case has far-reaching significance. The Yates prosecution is a case study in the dangers posed by “overcriminalization”: the existence of multitudinous, often overlapping criminal laws that are so poorly defined that they sweep within their ambit conduct far afield from their intended target.

The …

We The People: Juries, Not Judges, Should Be The Gatekeepers Of Expert Evidence, Krista M. Pikus

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note urges restoration of the proper balance of power between judges and juries regarding expert evidence. Our justice system has steadily moved away from letting juries decide important questions of fact and toward putting the decisionmaking power into the hands of judges. The recent developments in evidence law, requiring judges to act as the “gatekeepers” of expert evidence, present significant obstacles for plaintiffs attempting to get cases to a jury. This newer standard in expert evidence is a violation of the foundational precept in American jurisprudence that the people should be the sovereign, not the judge.

What The Best Evidence Rule Is - And What It Isn't, Cynthia Ford

Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings

No abstract provided.

Virginia's Gap Between Punishment And Culpability: Re-Examining Self-Defense Law And Battered Women's Syndrome, Kendall Hamilton

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Capping E-Discovery Costs: A Hybrid Solution To E-Discovery Abuse, Karel Mazanec

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Corporate Character, Robert E. Wagner

Florida Law Review

In the last few years, corporations have been accused of crimes ranging from environmental pollution on an unprecedented scale, to manslaughter, to election tampering, to large-scale antitrust violations. Many of these accused companies had previously committed similar acts or even the exact same offense. Unfortunately, the rules of evidence in the federal system and in virtually every state system prohibit the use of this information in a prosecution for such crimes. The reasons for this prohibition are based in historical anomalies, a mistaken understanding of corporate function, and a misplaced anthropomorphism of the corporation. This combination of errors has resulted …

Crime Control, Due Process, & Evidentiary Exclusion: When Exceptions Become The Rule, Elizabeth H. Kaylor

Proceedings of the New York State Communication Association

This paper uses the dichotomy between Herbert Packer’s (1968) two models of criminal justice advocacy – “crime control” and “due process” – as a rhetorical paradigm for understanding policy debate about the exclusion of relevant evidence at trial. Understanding the opposition between crime control and due process advocates as a rhetorical controversy, in which commonly-used ideographs camouflage dramatically different constructions of the concepts at stake, helps to illuminate the way each side mobilizes public support for their narrative of doing . While both the exclusionary rule (which prohibits the use of illegally-obtained evidence in criminal cases) and the “fruit of …

Emotional Fact-Finding, Emily Spottswood

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

The Legal Ethics Of Real Evidence: Of Child Porn On The Choirmaster's Computer And Bloody Knives Under The Stairs, Gregory C. Sisk

Washington Law Review

With little guidance from the Model Rules of Professional Conduct and continuing confusion on professional obligations, questions about engagement with real evidence continue to bedevil criminal defense lawyers, incite prosecutors, generate disputes, and attract judicial attention. Where should we draw that line between what is demanded by the professional duties of zealous advocacy and client confidentiality and what constitutes obstruction of justice? When may a document or object that could conceivably be relevant in some future investigation or proceeding be destroyed, altered, or removed? May a criminal defense lawyer take possession of evidence of a crime for purposes of analysis, …

Adoptive Admissions And The Duty To Speak: A Proposal For An Appropriate Test For The Admissibility Of Silence In The Face Of An Accusation, Bret Ruber

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

This Is Your Sword: How Damaging Are Prior Convictions To Plaintiffs In Civil Trials?, Kathryn Stanchi, Deirdre Bowen

Washington Law Review

The conventional wisdom in law is that a prior conviction is one of the most powerful and damaging pieces of evidence that can be offered against a witness or party. In legal lore, prior convictions seriously undercut the credibility of the witness and can derail the outcome of a trial. This Article suggests that may not always be true. This Article details the results of an empirical study of juror decision-making that challenges the conventional wisdom about prior convictions. In our study, the prior conviction evidence did not have a direct impact on the outcome of the civil trial or …

Blystone V. Horn: The Third Circuit Guards Against Inadvertent Waiver Of The Right To Present Mitigating Evidence During A Capital Case, Dylan J. Scher

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Reasonable Consideration Of Non-Shareholders: Redrafting State Constituency Statutes To Encourage Socially-Minded Business Decisions, Maxwell Silver-Thompson

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

Unintended Consequences: The Posse Comitatus Act In The Modern Era, Mark P. Nevitt

Cardozo Law Review

America was born in revolution. Outraged at numerous abuses by the British crown - to include the conduct of British soldiers in the colonists' daily lives - Americans declared their independence, creating a new republic with deep suspicions of a standing army. These suspicions were intensely debated at the time of the nation's formation and enshrined in the Constitution. But congressional limitations on the role of the military in day-to-day affairs would have to wait. This did not occur until after the Civil War when Southern congressmen successfully coopted the framers' earlier concerns of a standing army and passed a …

Confrontation And The Law Of Evidence: Can The Language Conduit Theory Survive In The Wake Of Crawford?, Tom S. Xu

Vanderbilt Law Review

A foreign traveler flies into John F. Kennedy International Airport, supposedly on a business trip. At the airport, a customs inspector detains him after discovering what appear to be bags of cocaine concealed in his luggage. The traveler speaks limited English, so the inspector requests the aid of a certified government interpreter to question him. An English-speaking Drug Enforcement Administration ("DEA") agent thereafter interrogates the traveler by having the interpreter translate his questions to Spanish, the traveler's native tongue. The interpreter then translates the traveler's responses from Spanish to English, and the inspector records the translated responses. At trial, the …

When Skeletons Come Out Of The Closet: Implications Of The Bosnian Genocide Decision For Serbia's Eventual Eu Accession, Edina Slomic

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Section 6: Criminal, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

The Use And Misuse Of Econometric Evidence In Employment Discrimination Cases, Joni Hersch, Blair Druhan Bullock

Washington and Lee Law Review

Statistical analyses play an important role in employment discrimination cases, as the Supreme Court has long recognized. Regression analysis can help a plaintiff establish a claim of discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by showing that, even when controlling for relevant characteristics, individuals of a certain class were treated differently than other employees or applicants. It can also help a defendant rebut such a claim by showing that differential treatment was due to characteristics other than being a member of a protected class. Yet, too often, opposing experts present invalid rebuttal evidence that the jury …

Rff Family Partnership, Lp V. Burns & Levinson, Llp: Massachusetts Constructs A Functional Framework For In-Firm Privilege And Exposes Other States' Need For Renovation, Kelsey Hughes-Blaum

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Eighth Circuit, Brief Of Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Gregory P. Warger, V. Randy D. Shauers, Susan Crump, Bennett Gershman, Victor Gold, Paul F. Rothstein, Ben Trachtenberg

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

Petitioner asks this Court to interpret Fed. R. Evid. 606(b) as permitting statements made by jurors during deliberations to be admitted to support a motion for a new trial. The practical consequences of petitioner’s rule would be significant and problematic, not only fundamentally altering the purpose and practice of voir dire, but also providing a new, fact driven, basis for post-trial motions. These expanded proceedings would place substantial additional burdens of courts, lawyers and jurors alike. In light of existing mechanisms to ensure juror honesty and impartiality, petitioner’s rule would disrupt a well-functioning system for little to no benefit.

Death By Daubert: The Continued Attack On Private Antitrust, Christine P. Bartholomew

Journal Articles

In 2011, with five words of dicta, the Supreme Court opened Pandora’s box for private antitrust enforcement. By suggesting trial courts must evaluate the admissibility of expert testimony at class certification, the Court placed a significant obstacle in the path of antitrust class actions. Following the Supreme Court’s lead, most courts now permit parties to bring expert challenges far earlier than the traditional summary judgment or pretrial timing. Premature rejection of expert testimony dooms budding private antitrust suits — cases that play an essential role in modern antitrust enforcement. The dangers for private antitrust plaintiffs are compounded by the Court’s …

Putting The Microscope On Crime Labs: The Effects Of Evidence Complexity And Laboratory Type On Jurors' Perceptions Of Forensic Evidence, Miliaikeala S.J. Heen

UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones

An experiment was conducted to test the effects of evidence complexity and laboratory type on jurors' perceptions of forensic evidence. The study specifically focused on three types of labs: public labs, private labs, and "corporate labs." Public labs are managed by a federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, where evidence is usually analyzed internally at an agency. Private labs are those that have been formed as private businesses to provide services to federal, state, and local crime labs with overflow work. Corporate labs are managed by major retail corporations, and primarily service the needs of their store businesses, but …

Death By Daubert: The Continued Attack On Private Antitrust, Christine P. Bartholomew

Cardozo Law Review

In 2011, with five words of dicta, the Supreme Court opened Pandora's Box for private antitrust enforcement. By suggesting trial courts must evaluate the admissibility of expert testimony at class certification, the Court placed a significant obstacle in the path of antitrust class actions. Following the Supreme Court's lead, most courts now permit parties to bring expert challenges far earlier than the traditional summary judgment or pre-trial timing. Premature rejection of expert testimony dooms budding private antitrust suits - cases that play an essential role in modern antitrust enforcement. The dangers for private antitrust plaintiffs are compounded by the Court's …

Dna Helps Clear Man's Name From Rape Charge After 24 Years, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Leavitt V. Siems, 130 Adv. Nev. Op. 54, Michael Paretti

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court concluded that: (1) expert alternative causation testimony is permissible; (2) ex parte communication, even when improper, only warrants a new trial when prejudice is established; and, (3) an employee’s default may not be used against an employer codefendant contesting liability.

The Religion Of Alcoholics Anonymous (Aa): Applying The Clergy Privilege To Certain Aa Communications, Ari J. Diaconis

Cornell Law Library Prize for Exemplary Student Research Papers

In the debate about AA’s status as a religion for clergy privilege purposes, there has been a lack of accurate information.315 AA originated from among the most evangelic of Christian movements, the Oxford Group. AA’s 12 Step program is so centered on a higher power as to preclude an atheist from moving beyond Step 2, let alone complete the entire 12 Step program.

AA’s historical origins and program of recovery are so faith based as to render it a religion under virtually any First Amendment definition.Indeed, courts have already defined AA as a religion in certain Establishment Clause contexts. To …

Evidence, W. Randall Bassett, Simon A. Rodell, Dmitry M. Epstein

Mercer Law Review

The 2013 term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit saw a number of precedential opinions dealing with a wide variety of evidentiary issues. Of particular interest to prosecutors and criminal defense attorneys are two Eleventh Circuit decisions applying the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause and a unanimous United States Supreme Court decision dealing with the Fifth Amendment's' right against self-incrimination as applied to psychiatric evidence. A number of published Eleventh Circuit decisions involved non-constitutional issues under the Federal Rules of Evidence, including balancing probative value against prejudicial effect under Rule 403, authentication of audio and video …

If Hard Drugs Were Legalized, Would More People Use Them?, David Borden

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article argues that criminal prohibition of drugs, including heroin, cocaine, and marijuana, causes significant harms such as public health crises, violent criminal activity, and civil liberties violations. It challenges predictions that legalization would lead to greatly increased drug use or harm, citing evidence that other factors, such as availability and social stigma, play a larger role in drug use decisions. The author advocates for ending prohibition and replacing it with regulation and public health programs tailored to each drug, emphasizing that legalization could reduce both individual and societal harm.