Evidence Commons^™

Criminal Law And Procedure, Michael T. Judge, Stephen R. Mccullough

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Practice And Procedure, Hon. Jane Marum Roush

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Book Review: Carl Cranor, Toxic Torts: Science, Law, And The Possibility Of Justice, David S. Caudill

Working Paper Series

Carl F. Cranor’s Toxic Torts: Science, Law, and the Possibility of Justice is a sustained, comprehensive argument that the Daubert gatekeeping regime has tilted the playing field against injured plaintiffs in toxic tort litigation. More generally, Cranor joins those who argue that the Daubert regime has not fared well in practice. Complex scientific evidence is not handled well in trials because scientific methods, data, and inferential reasoning are not well understood by gatekeeping judges. Cranor’s goal is to help solve this problem by offering a detailed description of the patterns of reasoning, evidence collection, and inference in nonlegal scientific settings. …

We Have A "Purpose" Requirement If We Can Keep It, James F. Flanagan

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court in Giles v. California held that a defendant forfeits the right to confront a witness only when he purposefully keeps the witness away. Many see the "purpose" requirement as an unjustified bar to the use of victim hearsay, particularly in domestic violence prosecutions where victims often refuse to appear. The author defends Giles as a correct reading of history, and independently justified by longstanding precedent that constitutional trial rights can only be lost by intentional manipulation of the judicial process. Moreover, the purpose requirement does not prevent prosecutions or convictions because the definition of testimonial hearsay is …

Admissibility Of Scientific Evidence And Expert Testimony: One Potato, Two Potato, Daubert, Frye, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This handout from a Maryland Judicial Institute presentation covers the Maryland Rules concerning expert testimony and the ways they differ from the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Summary Of Sonia F. Ex Rel. J.M. V. Dist. Ct., 125 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 38, Jason Vanmeetren

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Nevada’s rape shield law2 applies only to criminal proceedings and not civil cases. However, the district court may limit the discovery of an alleged victim’s sexual history to protect the victim’s privacy.

The Sixth Amendment And Expert Witnesses In Criminal Tax Cases, Steve R. Johnson

Scholarly Publications

Recently, in the Baxter case, a federal district court vacated the sentence imposed as a result of a guilty plea in a criminal tax case. The court held that the failure of defense counsel to retain the services of an expert in tax crimes sentencing violated the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to effective representation.

This installment of the Tax Crimes column explores Baxter. Part A briefly notes the civil and criminal tax contexts in which tax experts are used. Part B describes Baxter and its holding. Part C asks whether defense counsel in criminal tax cases should always retain a …

The Burden Of Establishing Patent Invalidity: Maintaining A Heightened Evidentiary Standard Despite Increasing "Verbal Variances", Etan S. Chatlynne

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Ordered Disclosure Of Historical Cell Site Location Information: The Argument For A Probable Cause Standard, Patrick T. Chamberlain

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Out-Of-Court Statements: The Concentric Hoops Of The Hearsay Rule And The Confrontation Clause, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This 44 page booklet created for the Maryland Judicial Institute outlines hearsay evidence, how hearsay overlaps with the Confrontation Clause, and the exceptions to hearsay under Maryland law.

The Legality And Practicality Of Remote Witness Testimony, Fredric Lederer

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

The Future For Collected Prosecutorial Evidence At The International Criminal Tribunal For Rwanda, Gerda Visser

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article focuses on the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and its Office of the Prosecutor (OTP), emphasizing the need to balance the preservation of sensitive information with the public's right to access historical records. It highlights the ICTR's role in developing international criminal law standards and the challenges of managing its vast archive, particularly regarding witness protection, privacy, and future prosecutions. The article proposes establishing an international judicial archive with a legal reviewing body to oversee access to the OTP database, ensuring transparency while safeguarding sensitive data.

Managing The Unmanageable: A Brief Accounting Of A Special Master’S Thirty Years Of Experience In Complex Litigation, Paul Rice

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Managing an efficient, but fair, pretrial process in a large and complex case has always been a challenge. With the advent of electronic communications and the corresponding explosion of privilege claims, this challenge has become significantly more difficult. Indeed, it is not uncommon for corporate parties to assert tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of privilege claims. Furthermore, the resolution of these privilege questions is often compounded by difficult choice of law questions that can have the result of different substantive principles being applied to identical discovery demands originating in different jurisdictions. Additionally, before addressing the increasingly voluminous …

The Dna Of An Argument: A Case Study In Legal Logos, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article develops a framework for analyzing legal argument through an in-depth case study of the debate over federal actions for post-conviction DNA access. Building on the Aristotelian concept of logos, this Article maintains that the persuasive power of legal logic depends in part on the rhetorical characteristics of premises, inferences, and conclusions in legal proofs. After sketching a taxonomy that distinguishes between prototypical argument logo (formal, empirical, narrative, and categorical), the Article applies its framework to parse the rhetorical dynamics at play in litigation over post-conviction access to DNA evidence under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, focusing in particular on …

Arsenic And Old Chemistry: Images Of Mad Alchemists, Experts Attacking Experts, And The Crisis In Forensic Science, David S. Caudill

Working Paper Series

Drawing on research into the use of experts in early 19th-century criminal trials, the image of mad alchemists in popular culture representations of science, and the distinction between empirical and contingent “interpretive repertoires” in the discourse of scientific controversies, this article explores the controversy over arsenic-detection technologies prior to the Marsh test. In addition to noting the predictable criticism of incompetent expertise in the service of law, this article highlights implied accusations of hubris and amorality on the part of over-confident experts, both in the early 19th-century and in today's crisis of forensic science.

Balancing Interests Under Washington's Statute Governing The Admissibility Of Extraneous Sex-Offense Evidence, Blythe Chandler

Washington Law Review

American courts traditionally exclude evidence that a defendant has committed crimes other than the crime with which the defendant is charged. This rule, with exceptions, is codified as Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and Washington Evidence Rule 404(b). However, courts and legislatures have increasingly adopted the view that evidence of other sex offenses should be admissible in sex-offense prosecutions. The Washington State Legislature recently adopted a statute, RCW 10.58.090, which governs the admissibility of evidence of other sex offenses. This Comment argues that Washington courts should use precedent applying Rule 404(b) as a guide in applying robust Rule 403 balancing …

The Impact Of Information Overload On The Capital Jury's Ability To Assess Aggravating And Mitigating Factors, Katie Morgan, Michael J. Zydney Mannheimer

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Since 1976, the U.S. Supreme Court has required that death penalty regimes meet two requirements. First, in order to minimize arbitrariness in the imposition of the death penalty, states must reserve capital punishment to a narrow class of offenders, those most deserving of death. States have done so by requiring that the prosecution prove at least one aggravating factor, i.e., some circumstance that separates the capital defendant on trial from those ineligible to be executed. Second, states must allow for individualization in sentencing by permitting the defendant to introduce mitigating evidence in order to persuade the jury that he is …

"An Opportunity For Effective Cross-Examination": Limits On The Confrontation Right Of The Pro Se Defendant, Alanna Clair

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The rights of a defendant to confront his accusers and conduct his defense without the assistance of counsel are sacrosanct in the American judicial system. The rights of the defendant are even sometimes exalted at the expense of the rights of the public or of victims of crime. This Note examines the problem of a pro se defendant using his confrontation right to intimidate or harass his alleged victims testifying against him. It is well-established that the confrontation right is not unconditional. The problem comes in determining whether the courts can place limits on the confrontation right of a pro …

Vol. Ix, Tab 43 - Google Memorandum In Support Of Its Motion To Exclude Expert Report And Opinion Of Dr. Kent Van Liere, 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?

Standards Of Proof Revisited, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This Essay focuses not on how fact-finders process evidence but on how they apply the specified standard of proof to their finding. The oddity that prompts speculation is that, in noncriminal cases, the common law asks only that the fact appear more likely than not, while the Civil Law seems to apply the same high standard in these cases as it does in criminal cases. As a psychological explanation of the cognitive processes involved, some theorists posit that the bulk of fact-finding is an unconscious process, powerful but dangerous, which generates a level of confidence against which the fact-finder could …

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.

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 …

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 …