Evidence Commons^™

Verbal Speech Versus Visual Art: Evidence Of Unequal First Amendment Protection In Right Of Publicity Jurisprudence, Daniel Forman

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

Determining When Extrinsic Evidence Not Attached To Or Incorporated By Reference In A Pleading May Be Considered On A Rule 12 Dismissal Motion, Laurence A. Steckman, Rita D. Turner

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Evaluating The Evaluation: Reliance Upon Mental Health Assessments In Cases Of Alleged Child Sexual Abuse, Sarah F. Shelton

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Admissibility Of Trueallele: A Computerized Dna Interpretation System, Katherine L. Moss

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Tribal Courts Part Ii: Crow, Ft. Belknap, Fort Peck And Northern Cheyenne, Cynthia Ford

Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings

No abstract provided.

Hiding The Elephant: How The Psychological Techniques Of Magicians Can Be Used To Manipulate Witnesses At Trial, Sydney A. Beckman

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Should The Medium Affect The Message? Legal And Ethical Implications Of Prosecutors Reading Inmate-Attorney Email, Brandon P. Ruben

Fordham Law Review

    The attorney-client privilege protects confidential legal communications between a party and her attorney from being used against her, thus encouraging full and frank attorney-client communication. It is a venerable evidentiary principle of American jurisprudence. Unsurprisingly, prosecutors may not eavesdrop on inmate-attorney visits or phone calls or read inmate-attorney postal mail. Courts are currently divided, however, as to whether or not they can forbid prosecutors from reading inmate- attorney email.

    This Note explores the cases that address whether federal prosecutors may read inmates’ legal email. As courts have unanimously held, because inmates know that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) monitors all …

Evidence Rules In Montana's Tribal Courts, Part I Of Ii, Cynthia Ford

Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings

No abstract provided.

Letting Innocence Suffer: The Need For Defense Access To The Law Enforcement Dna Database, Jason Kreag

Cardozo Law Review

Law enforcement has gradually amassed a sizable DNA database that holds considerable promise for solving cold cases and identifying suspects. The Supreme Court has blessed this effort, allowing investigators to include profiles of arrestees as well as convicted persons in the database. At present, though, law enforcement has a near monopoly on use of the DNA database, leaving defendants at the whim of the law enforcement officials who control access to this tool. Legal scholars have alternatively praised and decried the database, but none has examined its prospects for proving defendants' innocence post-conviction. This Article fills that void by identifying …

Hijacking Justice: Assessing The Emergency Driven Analysis Of Confrontation Clause Jurisprudence, Steven C. Berlowitz

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

"New Wine In An Old Bottle": The Advent Of Social Media Discovery In Pennsylvania Civil Litigation Matters, Daniel E. Cummins

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Testimonial Is As Testimonial Does, Ben Trachtenberg

Florida Law Review

In the decade since Crawford v. Washington declared “testimony” to be the touchstone of the Confrontation Clause, courts—from the humblest criminal trial court to the Supreme Court itself—have struggled with two problems. First, defining “testimonial” has proven difficult. Second, in certain cases, the results of defining “testimonial” as Crawford would seem to require have proven unappealing. Justice Antonin Scalia, the author of the majority opinion in Crawford and the most vocal cheerleader of its new doctrine, has consequently had trouble maintaining a majority of Justices for what would seem to be straightforward applications of the opinion. Professor Richard D. Friedman …

The Mold That Shapes Hearsay Law, Richard D. Friedman

Florida Law Review

In response to an article previously published in the Florida Law Review by Professor Ben Trachtenberg, Professor Friedman argues that the historical thesis of Crawford v. Washington is basically correct: The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment reflects a principle about how witnesses should give testimony, and it does not create any broader constraint on the use of hearsay. Friedman argues that this is an appropriate limit on the Clause, and that in fact for the most part there is no good reason to exclude nontestimonial hearsay if live testimony by the declarant to the same proposition would be admissible. …

Hague Evidence Convention: A Practical Guide To The Convention, United States Case Law, Convention - Sponsored Review Commissions (1978 And 1985), And Responses Of Other Signatory Nations: With Digest Of Cases And Bibliography, Denise L. Dunham

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Reasonable Expectations Of Privacy Settings: Social Media And The Stored Communications Act, Christopher J. Borchert, Fernando M. Pinguelo, David Thaw

Duke Law & Technology Review

In 1986, Congress passed the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”) to provide additional protections for individuals’ private communications content held in electronic storage by third parties. Acting out of direct concern for the implications of the Third-Party Records Doctrine—a judicially created doctrine that generally eliminates Fourth Amendment protections for information entrusted to third parties—Congress sought to tailor the SCA to electronic communications sent via and stored by third parties. Yet, because Congress crafted the SCA with language specific to the technology of 1986, courts today have struggled to apply the SCA consistently with regard to similar private content sent using different …

Imaging Brains, Changing Minds: How Pain Neuroimaging Can Inform The Law, Amanda C. Pustilnik

Faculty Scholarship

What would the law do differently if it could see into the black box of the mind? One of the most valuable things it might do is reform the ways it deals with pain. Pain is ubiquitous in law, from tort to torture, from ERISA to expert evidence. Yet legal doctrines grapple with pain poorly, embodying concepts that are generations out of date and that cast suspicion on pain sufferers as having a problem that is “all in their heads.”

Now, brain-imaging technologies are allowing scientists to see the brain in pain—and to reconceive of many types of pain as …

Signal Vs. Noise: Some Comments On Professor Stein's Theory Of Evidential Efficiency, Emily Spottswood

Scholarly Publications

In this Essay, I examine Professor Stein's intriguing new theory of evidential efficiency, which posits that judges should admit evidence whenever it has a sufficiently high "signal-to-noise ratio." I explore a slightly different definition of the concepts of "signal" and "noise" than Stein, based upon likelihood ratio values rather than the underlying probabilities of events, and I explain why these altered concepts may be analytically superior. Additionally, I call into question the strength of the connection between the signal-to-noise ratio of a piece of evidence and the costs of admitting it at trial. Nevertheless, Stein's project is worthy of great …

Scientific Advances In Eyewitness Identification Evidence, Nancy K. Steblay

William Mitchell Law Review

No abstract provided.

Recent Development: Hailes V. State: The State May Appeal A Trial Court's Ruling Excluding A Dying Declaration; The Length Of Time Between A Declarant's Statement And Death Is Irrelevant In A Dying Declaration Analysis; The Confrontation Clause Is Inapplicable To Dying Declarations, Lauren A. Panfile

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the State may appeal a trial court’s suppression of a victim’s dying declaration based on the legislative intent of Section 12-302(c)(4)(i) of the Maryland Code, Courts and Judicial Procedure Article (“section 12-302(c)(4)(i)”). Hailes v. State, 442 Md. 488, 497-98, 113 A.3d 608, 613-14 (2015). The court further held that a victim’s statement, made while on life support, was a dying declaration regardless of the fact that the victim died two years after making the statement. Id. at 506, 113 A.3d at 618. Finally, the court held that the Confrontation Clause of the …

Recent Development: Sublet V. State: Authentication Of Evidence From Social Networking Websites Requires A Trial Judge To Find Sufficient Proof From Which A Reasonable Juror Could Conclude That The Evidence Is What The Proponent Claims It To Be, Denise A. Blake

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland, in three consolidated cases, held that a trial judge must determine that evidence from a social networking website meets the “reasonable juror” standard of authentication as a condition precedent to admissibility. Sublet v. State, 442 Md. 632, 678, 113 A.3d 695, 722 (2015). This standard requires a preliminary determination by the trial judge that a reasonable juror could find the evidence is what the proponent claims it to be.

Visualizing Dna Proof, Nicholas L. Georgakopoulos

Criminal Law Practitioner

No abstract provided.

Amending Rape Shield Laws: Outdated Statutes Fail To Protect Victims On Social Media, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1087 (2015), Sydney Janzen

UIC Law Review

This Comment will first discuss the discoverability and admissibility of social media evidence in criminal and/or civil sexual assault cases. Section II(A) provides a broad overview of both federal and state rape shield laws, including the legislative policies behind their enactments, as well as the modern expansion of social media in the context of the legal system. Section II(B) will address the modern utility of social media in the context of the legal system. Section III first analyzes how courts look at discoverability and admissibility of social media evidence generally, and then focuses on sexual assault cases specifically. Further, Section …

Taking A Bite Out Of Forensic Science: The Misuse Of Accelerant-Detecting Dogs In Arson Cases, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1149 (2015), Andrew Scott

UIC Law Review

This Comment identifies the proper uses of canine handler teams in arson investigations and trials. Part II discusses the origins of forensic science in criminal trials, the use of expert witnesses in the courtroom, the history and role of forensic science and canine handler teams in arson cases, and the problem of “junk science.” Part III analyzes the pros and cons of using canine handler teams in arson investigations and the dilemma courts face when confronted with unconfirmed canine alerts. Part IV resolves the issue of using canine handler teams in arson investigations. First, it advocates for their continued use …

Tell Us A Story But Don’T Make It A Good One: Embracing The Tension Regarding Emotional Stories And The Federal Rule Of Evidence 403, Cathren Koehlert-Page

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Forensic Evidence And The Court Of Appeal For England And Wales, Lissa Griffin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal has extensively analyzed the role of forensic evidence. In doing so, the court has grappled with the admissibility and reliability of a broad range of forensic evidence, from DNA and computer forensics to medical and psychological proof, to more outlying subjects like facial mapping, fiber analysis, or voice identification. The court has analyzed these subjects from two perspectives: the admissibility of such evidence in the lower courts and the admissibility of such evidence as fresh evidence on appeal. In both contexts, the court has taken a practical approach to admitting forensic proof …

Panel 3: Chronic Pain, Psychogenic Pain, And Emotion, Robert Dinerstein

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Negotiator's Nook: The Ins And Outs Of Effective Negotiation, David Spratt

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

The Compensation Conundrum In Partial Takings Cases And The Consequences Of Borough Of Harvey Cedars, Brittany Harrison

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

This Note suggests that the goals the Harvey Cedars court sought to achieve—including reduced windfalls and greater certainty in the law—would best be achieved by applying the market value rule as adopted in California, which follows a value plus damages approach and requires payment for the part taken. Part I of this Note introduces the Harvey Cedars case. Part II provides a historical background to partial takings cases and a discussion of the special benefits doctrine, a type of compensation method that emerged as a compromise position to compensation to better protect condemnees. Part III surveys the various compensation methods …

Data Breach (Regulatory) Effects, David Thaw

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

Breach notification laws have been a major driver of data protection efforts in U.S. organizations for more than a decade. This form of disclosure-based regulation exists in 47 of 50 U.S. states, as well as four other U.S. jurisdictions, but has yet to be adopted as a law of general applicability at the federal level.

This Essay considers the effects the structure of existing disclosure-based cybersecurity regulation has on the efficacy of U.S. firms’ cybersecurity measures. Drawing on previous empirical work and analysis of firm incentives, it suggests two modest conclusions about the most efficacious legal structures: (1) that any …

Cell Phones, Brain Cancer, And Scientific Outliers In Murray V. Motorola, David H. Kaye

Faculty Scholarship

Pending before the District of Columbia's highest court in a case asking whether cell phones can cause cancer is whether to replace the jurisdiction's venerable Frye standard for reviewing the admissibility of scientific evidence with the approach adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow. The author analyzes one aspect of the two evidentiary standards that leads him to question the trial judge's suggestion in Murray v. Motorola that adopting the Daubert perspective would allow greater leeway in excluding the plaintiff's evidence.