Evidence Commons^™

Constitutional Constraints On The Admissibility Of Grand Jury Testimony: The Unavailable Witness, Confrontation, And Due Process, Barbara L. Strack

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Defendants, however, have raised serious constitutional objections to the introduction of grand jury testimony when the witness is unavailable to testify at trial. These claims have focused on the confrontation clause of the sixth amendment and the due process clauses of the fifth and fourteenth amendments. Defendants have contended that the introduction of testimony from a grand jury proceeding which cannot be subjected to cross-examination fatally compromises the defendant's right to a fair trial. Lower courts are split over admitting grand jury testimony in these circumstances, and the Supreme Court has yet to rule on the issue. As a result, …

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 …

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. …

Parent-Child Incest: Proof At Trial Without Testimony In Court By The Victim, Dustin P. Ordway

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note argues that the incest victim should not testify personally at trial. Rather, the child's testimony should be replaced with tape-recorded pretrial examinations of the victim by an expert, supplemented by the in-court testimony of the examining expert. Part I discusses how the present system of requiring in-court testimony by the victim harms the child, fails to correct the incest problem, and produces unreliable evidence. Part II outlines and discusses the merits of the proposed reform. Part ill examines the proposed reform in light of the defendant's constitutional rights to due process and to confront witnesses against him. The …

A Right To Every Woman's Evidence, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

I am indeed honored to be here with you today, honored to be joining you next year as Iowa's first Mason Ladd Visiting Distinguished Professor of Law, and honored to be giving the first Mason Ladd Lecture. The honor lies not just in the recognition you accord me, but also in the linkage to the man in whose name this recognition is given.

Reflections On Alfred Hill's "Testimonial Privilege And Fair Trial", Peter Westen

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

I have learned a great deal from "Testimonial Privilege and Fair Trial"-as I always do from Professor Hill's work. Indeed, he has changed my way of thinking in this area in several important respects. At the same time, I come to rather different conclusions than he regarding each of his three major topics. Part I of this article examines the problem of finding a "remedy" for testimonial privileges that violate a defendant's right to a fair trial. Part II discusses the problem of determining when a defendant is entitled to assert that the "right" has been violated. Finally, Part III …

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

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 …

Rules Pertaining To Witnesses, John W. Reed

Book Chapters

Article VI of the Michigan Rules of Evidence contains the rules dealing with witnesses. Trials bring to mind testimonial evidence. There surely are other kinds of evidence, such as docmnents, guns, automobile tires, chemical substances, and the like. But most evidence comes from the mouths of witnesses, and even demonstrative evidence usually is admitted only after a witness has taken the stand and testified to foundation facts. So it is important and appropriate that we turn to the provisions of the rules that deal with qualifications and credibility of witnesses. I would like to direct your attention to MRE 601 …

Opinions And Expert Testimony, John W. Reed

Book Chapters

Article VI of the Michigan Rules of Evidence contains the rules dealing with witnesses. Trials bring to mind testimonial evidence. There surely are other kinds of evidence, such as docmnents, guns, automobile tires, chemical substances, and the like. But most evidence comes from the mouths of witnesses, and even demonstrative evidence usually is admitted only after a witness has taken the stand and testified to foundation facts. So it is important and appropriate that we turn to the provisions of the rules that deal with qualifications and credibility of witnesses. I would like to direct your attention to MRE 601 …

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 …

Proffitt V. State, 315 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1975), Elaine Kay Freemyer

Florida State University Law Review

Evidence- HUSBAND-WIFE PRIVILEGE- TESTIMONY OF THIRD PARTY EAVESDROPPER CONCERNING PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION ADMISSIBLE WHERE PRIVILEGED PARTY KNOWS OR HAS REASON TO KNOW OF EAVESDROPPER'S PRESENCE.

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 …

Credibility And Character: A Different Look At An Interminable Problem, Robert G. Lawson

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The problems of character evidence "resolved" by the new Federal Rules are problems that involve the structure of human personality. The judgmental processing by jurors of character information involves a behavioral transaction called interpersonal perception. Each of these psychological problems has been intensively investigated for nearly 40 years. As the character problems of the law now take on the appearance of having been solved, there is not the slightest indication that the results of this scientific endeavor influenced the choices made by the law. The solutions to these problems composed by the Judicial Conference and embraced by the Supreme Court …

The Effects Of Videotape Testimony In Jury Trials: Studies On Juror Decision Making, Information Retention, And Emotional Arousal, Gerald R. Miller, David C. Bender, Frank Boster, B. Thomas Florence, Norman Fontes, John Hocking, Henry Nicholson

BYU Law Review

Summary of Contents

I. Introduction: The Nature of the Research

II. Group I : The Nugent u. Clark Studies

A. Background

1. Selecting the stimulus trial

2. Editing the transcript

3. Preparing the trial

a. Casting

b. Equipment

B. Nugent u. Clark Study

1 : live v. videotape trials 1. Questions examined

2. Procedures

a. The live presentation

b. The videotape presentation

c. The questionnaire

3. Results and discussion

a. Negligence verdicts and mean awards

b. Juror perception of attorney credibility

c. Juror information retention

d. Juror interest and motivation

4. Conclusions from Study 1

C. Nugent u. Clark Study …

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 …

Evidence Code: Opinions And Expert Testimony, Charles W. Ehrhardt

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Title Iii - Recalcitrant Witnesses, Jeffrey J. Greenbaum

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This title represents a congressional attempt to codify the court-developed civil contempt practice. When a witness is granted immunity and still refuses to answer the question presented to him he can be ordered by a court to answer the specific question. Upon his continued refusal, a court can have him confined summarily until he complies with such order, or until he is no longer able to comply. Such confinement is not intended to be punitive in nature, but rather to coerce compliance with the court's order by imposing imprisonment as an alternative to answering the question. The witness will be …

Title Vi - Depositions, Peter A. Kelly

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Title VI expands Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to permit the Government to depose its witnesses in certain limited classes of cases. Previously only the defendant had been accorded this right. Upon the motion of either party at any time after a criminal indictment or information has been filed, the court may order that the testimony of the party's witnesses be taken by deposition if "due to exceptional circumstances it is in the interest of justice" that such testimony be taken and preserved. Such exceptional circumstances were intended by Congress to include the existence of a …

Title Iv - False Declarations, Jeffrey J. Greenbaum

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Title IV was designed to facilitate the bringing of federal perjury prosecutions, thereby strengthening the deterrent value of the perjury penalties and acting as a greater incentive for truthful testimony. It establishes a new false declarations statute applicable to court and grand jury proceedings, with maximum penalty slightly increased over that allowable under the previously controlling perjury statute.

Evidence--Medical Treatises To Be Admitted As Direct Evidence In Wisconsin--Lewandowski V. Preferred Risk Mutual Ins. Co., Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Defendant's attorney in a personal injury action sought on cross-examination to impeach plaintiff's physician regarding his determination of the degree of plaintiff's disability by referring to the medical standards set forth in the American Medical Association's Guide to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment--The Extremities and Back. Pointing to the physician's testimony that he had not relied on the Guide in making his evaluation, the trial court sustained plaintiff's objection that such cross-examination was not permissible. On appeal, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the trial court was correct in sustaining the objection in accordance with the established rule that it …

The Psychiatrist As An Expert Witness: Some Ruminations And Speculations, Bernard L. Diamond, David W. Louisell

Michigan Law Review

Consider the difference between the expert testimony of an orthopedic surgeon in a personal injury suit and the testimony of a psychiatrist in a murder trial in which some elements of the mens rea are at issue. In both instances an expert opinion is received in evidence, providing the trier of fact with technical, specialized information which must, or should, be available in order to permit a rational decision-making process. Well-established rules govern the nature of expert evidence and its mode of presentation. In legal theory, the orthopedic surgeon and the psychiatrist are both experts-physicians-who perform comparable functions in the …

Compulsory Husband-Wife Testimony In Criminal Cases

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Grand Jury Secrecy, Richard M. Calkins

Michigan Law Review

When a leading state such as Illinois enacts "reform" legislation, an impact on the legislatures of other jurisdictions may be anticipated. Accordingly, a need exists for an examination of this legislation in the light of the common-law background of grand jury secrecy and for a further analysis of it in the face of the growing trend toward more liberalized discovery of grand jury minutes in other jurisdictions. It is the contention of the author that such an empirical study will demonstrate that this legislation adopted by Illinois is contrary to all modern judicial thinking and is, in fact, a retrogressive …

Evidence-Admissibility And Weight Of Photographs, James W. Collier

Michigan Law Review

In a prosecution for fellatio, the people's only witness was a woman who testified that she had participated in the alleged activity with the defendant. Her testimony also verified for introduction a motion picture purporting to show the alleged violations. Defendant was convicted on the basis of this evidence. On appeal, held, reversed. A conviction cannot be sustained on the basis of an accomplice's uncorroborated testimony; and the film, although properly admitted, could not supply the necessary corroboration, since a determination of its accuracy must rely upon the accomplice's foundation testimony. People v. Bowley, 59 Cal. 2d …

Evidence-Hearsay-Exclusion Of Self-Serving Declarations, John M. Price S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

One of the most venerable of all legal principles is the evidentiary rule excluding hearsay. This rule, which was first espoused by the English courts in the sixteenth century, arose when it became apparent that there was an inherent danger of untrustworthiness in a witness's uncorroborated recital of a prior declaration made outside the courtroom. The courts gave several reasons for regarding hearsay as untrustworthy. First, these statements, offered into evidence for the truth of the matter asserted, were not made under oath. Secondly, objection to such testimony was raised because the trier of fact had no opportunity to pass …

A Re-Evaluation Of The Privilege Against Adverse Spousal Testimony In The Light Of Its Purpose, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The recent development in American federal criminal evidence law to be examined and compared with English law in this paper, is a new evolutionary turn taken by the husband-wife privilege against adverse spousal testimony, manifest in the Supreme Court decision of Wyatt v. United States. The House of Lords, in Rumping v. D.P.P., just decided, suggests that the English spousal privileges might be susceptible of similar development.

Packer: Ex-Communist Witnesses, Malcolm Sharp

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Ex-Communist Witnesses. By Herbert L. Packer