Evidence Commons^™

Weatherford V. Bursey: "Surreptitious Invasion… Into The Legal Camp Of The Defense", Paul H. Voss

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Limiting The Use Of Prior Felony Convictions To Impeach A Defendant - Witness In California Criminal Proceedings, Richard E. Boehm

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Punitive Damages: An Exception To The Right Of Privacy? Coy V. Superior Court, Richard S. Fields

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Criminal Discovery Reform: A Legislative Approach, Bruce A. Green

Mercer Law Review

Suppose that federal prosecutors have conducted an investigation culminating in an indictment. Although the prosecutors believe that they have enough evidence to secure a conviction and are personally convinced that the defendant is guilty, some of the evidence they have collected is favorable to the defendant, because it tends to show that the defendant is innocent or that prosecution witnesses should not be believed. Must prosecutors disclose the favorable evidence to defense counsel to use in investigating, advising the defendant, plea negotiations, or trial? Under current federal law, the answer is generally "no." Unless favorable evidence falls within one of …

Williams V. Illinois: Confronting Experts, Science, And The Constitution, Natasha Crawford

Mercer Law Review

DNA evidence has revolutionized forensic science, making it the "single greatest advance in the search for truth.., since the advent of cross-examination." In Williams v. Illinois, the United States Supreme Court affirmed the Illinois Supreme Court's holding that there was no Confrontation Clause violation where experts based their testimony on another analyst's DNA report that was not admitted into evidence. The Court held an expert may assume the truth of certain facts-such as a DNA profile contained in a forensic report-to offer testimony based on those facts without testifying to the truth of the matter asserted. Until Williams, the …

The Proposed Fairness In Disclosure Of Evidence Act Of 2012: More Cons Than Pros With Proposed Disclosure Requirements In Federal Criminal Cases, Jacquelyn Smith

Mercer Law Review

The proposed Fairness in Disclosure of Evidence Act of 2012 (the Act) is a proposal of uniform standards for disclosing evidence in federal criminal cases that was introduced on March 15, 2012 by Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.' The Act's stated purpose is: "To require the attorney for the Government to disclose favorable information to the defendant in criminal prosecutions brought by the United States, and for

Subverting Brady V. Maryland And Denying A Fair Trial: Studying The Schuelke Report, Bennett L. Gershman

Mercer Law Review

The Schuelke Report about the ill-fated federal prosecution of the late-Senator Ted Stevens is an extraordinary contribution to criminal procedure. No other official documentation or investigative study of a criminal prosecution, to my knowledge, has dissected and analyzed as carefully and thoroughly the sordid and clandestine actions of a team of prosecutors who zealously wanted to win a criminal conviction at all costs. In examining this Report, one gets the feeling that as the investigation and prosecution of Senator Stevens unfolded and the prosecution's theory of guilt unraveled, the prosecutors became indifferent to the defendant's guilt or innocence. They just …

Prosecutorial Disclosure Violations: Punishment Vs. Treatment, Kevin C. Mcmunigal

Mercer Law Review

Recent scholarship on prosecutorial disclosure violations proposes preventing violations through understanding and remedying the causes of violations, such as cognitive error. Scholars who adopt this view-what I call here the "treatment perspective"-often call for greater transparency and cooperation from prosecutors. A frequently unacknowledged tension exists between such a treatment perspective and a more traditional perspective-what I call here the "punishment perspective"-that seeks to deter disclosure violations through greater use of sanctions such as professional discipline.

The tension arises because increasing the certainty and severity of sanctions, as the punishment perspective urges, creates a powerful disincentive for individual prosecutors and prosecutor …

Why Federal Rule Of Evidence 403 Is Unconstitutional, And Why That Matters, Kenneth S. Klein

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Evidence Issues In Indian Law Cases, Taylor S. Fielding

American Indian Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Counsel's Control Over The Presentation Of Mitigating Evidence During Capital Sentencing, James Michael Blakemore

Michigan Law Review

The Sixth Amendment gives a defendant the right to control his defense and the right to a lawyer's assistance. A lawyer's assistance, however, sometimes interferes with a defendant's control over his case. As a result, the Supreme Court, over time, has had to delineate the spheres of authority that pertain to counsel and defendant respectively. The Court has not yet decisively assigned control over mitigating evidence to either counsel or defendant. This Note argues that counsel should control the presentation of mitigating evidence during capital sentencing. First, and most importantly, decisions concerning the presentation of mitigating evidence are best characterized …

Research Project, David J. Agatstein

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Evidence For Administrative Law Judges, Christine Mckenna Moore

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Argument And Courtroom Theatrics, Larry Geller, Peter Hemenway

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Vocational Testimony In Social Security Hearings, Daniel F. Solomon

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Developments In The Law Of Scientific Evidence: The Admissibility Of Polygraph Evidence, Sheila K. Hyatt

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Polygraph Examinations In Administrative Proceedings: Mcgowan V. City Of Bloomington, David J. Agatstein

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Unrebutted Evidence, E. J. Watts, David J. Agatstein

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Workers Compensation: Presenting Medical Evidence In Heart Cases, Gerald J. Haas, Lowell A. Reed Jr, Irvin Stander

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Evidence Column, Paul Troeh Jr.

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Two Notes On Evidence: Privileges And Hearsay, J. W. Deese

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Impeachment In Administrative Cases, Calvin William Sharpe

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Relevancy Of Evidence In Administrative Law Proceedings, J. W. Deese

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Judges In The Executive Branch And Judges In The Judicial Branch: Similar, Yet Distinct, Thomas G. Welshko

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

The Right To Cross-Examine Physicians In Social Security Disability Cases, Victor G. Rosenblum

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This Article examines the alternative readings and rationales of Richardson v. Perales regarding the cross-examination of reporting physicians in social security disability claim hearings. First, Part II compares the Sixth and Second Circuit's interpretation of the Perales rule, which supports the SSA's regulation and interpretation, to the Fifth Circuit's interpretation, which explicitly proclaims cross-examination, once duly requested, to be an absolute right. Part III questions whether the Perales Court's declaration that the SSA is “an [impartial] adjudicator and not . . . an advocate or adversary” remains empirically valid. Part IV discusses the SSA's recent assertions of management prerogatives that …

When Dicta Attacks: Elliott V. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Joanna E. Barnes

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

The Impact Of Adverse Inferences In Administrative Hearings, John M. Priester

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

The Role Of Demeanor Evidence In Determining Credibility Of Witnesses In Fact Finding: The Views Of Aljs, Gregory L. Ogden

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

Prof. Ogden presents the views of administrative law judge’s on the role of demeanor evidence in determining the credibility of witnesses’ testimony in fact finding. The opinions of administrative law judges add an important new perspective on the issue of whether demeanor evidence increases the accuracy of credibility determinations. The views of administrative law judges were determined through the techniques of survey research, utilizing a questionnaire. After defining demeanor evidence for purposes of the study, Ogden explains the administrative law principle of judicial review that gives weight or deference to credibility determinations based on demeanor evidence. A statistical analysis of …

Summary Of Newman V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 24, Sara Stephan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a jury conviction in the Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County, of battery by strangulation and willfully endangering a child as a result of child abuse. The Nevada Supreme Court addressed two issues both rooted in NRS 48.045’s prohibition against using character or prior-bad-act evidence to prove criminal propensity. The defendant did not mount a conventional accidental injury defense to the child abuse charge and admitted to possessing an aggressive character, eliminating the relevance for evidence showing this to be true.

Death And Politics: The Role Of Demographic Characteristics And Testimony Type In Death Penalty Cases Involving Future Dangerousness Testimony, Amy Magnus, Miliaikeala Heen, Joel D. Lieberman

Graduate Research Symposium (2010 - 2017)

Past research examining expert future dangerousness prediction testimony in death penalty cases and civil confinement hearings for sex offenders has found that jurors tend to be more persuaded by less scientific “clinical” testimony and less influenced by “actuarial” based testimony. Jurors demonstrate greater receptivity for clinical testimony despite the fact that actuarial testimony has been shown to be a better predictor of future dangerousness. Research in this area has focused on identifying cognitive factors that can potentially be manipulated during a trial to increase the effectiveness of actuarial testimony on jurors. A mock jury study was conducted to extend these …