Evidence Commons^™

From The Wrong End Of The Telescope: A Response To Professor David Bernstein, Margaret A. Berger, Aaron D. Twerski

Michigan Law Review

On the pages of this law review, in an article entitled Uncertainty and Informed Choice: Unmasking Daubert, the authors argued for the recognition of a new product liability cause of action when drug companies fail to warn about uncertain risks attendant to the use of non-therapeutic drugs whose purpose is to enhance lifestyle. We noted that in the post-Daubert era, plaintiffs have faced increasing difficulty in proving that a given toxic agent was causally responsible for the injuries suffered after ingesting a drug. That plaintiffs cannot overcome the barriers to proving injury causation does not mean that defendants have met …

Getting Control Of Waiver Of Privilege In The Federal Courts : A Proposal For A Federal Rule Of Evidence 502, Daniel J. Capra

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Are Patented Research Tools Still Valuable? Use, Intent, And A Rebuttable Presumption: A Proposed Modification For Analyzing The Exemption From Patent Infringement Under 35 Usc 271 (E) (1), Vihar R. Patel

ExpressO

Briefly, the article proposes to have courts focus on the nature of an individual's use and apply the "UART" (Use As a Research Tool) factors to determine if a patented invention is being used as a research tool. If a patented invention is being used as a research tool, then the court is to presume that the activities are not covered by the FDA exemption. However, this presumption can be rebutted by a researcher's demonstration of the research tool owner using his patent to block efforts to develop a competing product. If the presumption is rebutted, then the court applies …

Forgetting Freud: The Courts' Fear Of The Subconscious In Date Rape (And Other) Criminal Cases, Andrew E. Taslitz

ExpressO

Courts too often show a reluctance to learn the lessons taught by social science in criminal cases, especially where subconcious processes are involved. The subconscious is seen as rarely relevant and, in the unusual cases where it is relevant, it is viewed as a disease commandeering the conscious mind and thus helping to exculpate the accused. Drawing on the example of forensic linguistics in date rape cases as illustrative of a broader phenomenon, this article argues that the courts' misuse of social science stems from fear and misunderstanding of the workings of the subconscious mind. Accordingly, the piece contrasts the …

Evidence, Marc T. Treadwell

Mercer Law Review

This survey year saw the continuation of what has become a clear trend in Eleventh Circuit evidence decisions. In stark contrast to the days when the Eleventh Circuit rigorously examined district court evidentiary decisions and freely reversed those decisions, the Eleventh Circuit now studiously defers to district judges. The reason for this trend can be debated. Perhaps because most evidentiary issues addressed by the Eleventh Circuit arise in the context of criminal cases, and because Eleventh Circuit judges are more conservative today, the Eleventh Circuit is less likely to reverse criminal convictions, particularly on evidentiary grounds. Or perhaps that the …

Wishing Petitioners To Death: Factual Misrepresentations In Fourth Circuit Capital Cases, Sheri Lynn Johnson

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

It's Not Just About Miranda: Determining The Voluntariness Of Confessions In Criminal Prosecutions, Paul Marcus

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Bond Repudiation, Tax Codes, The Appropriations Process And Restitution Post-Eminent Domain Reform, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

This brief comment suggests where the anti-eminent domain movement might be heading next.

The “Csi Effect”: Better Jurors Through Television And Science?, Michael D. Mann

ExpressO

This Comment discusses how television shows such as CSI and Law & Order create heightened juror expectations. This will be published in the Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal's 2005-2006 issue.

A Default-Logic Paradigm For Legal Reasoning And Factfinding, Vern R. Walker

ExpressO

Unlike research in linguistics and artificial intelligence, legal research has not used advances in logical theory very effectively. This article uses default logic to develop a paradigm for analyzing all aspects of legal reasoning, including factfinding. The article provides a formal model that integrates legal rules and policies with the evaluation of both expert and non-expert evidence – whether the reasoning occurs in courts or administrative agencies, and whether in domestic, foreign, or international legal systems. This paradigm can standardize the representation of legal reasoning, guide empirical research into the dynamics of such reasoning, and put the representations and research …

Judicial Anarchy: The Admission Of Convictions To Impeach -State Supreme Court Interpretive Standards, 1990-2004, Dannye Holley

ExpressO

This is the second and sequential national study of an important evidence and criminal justice issue - the admission of convictions to impeach. It is a longitudinal national study of how state supreme courts have recently, over the last decade and one-half, evaluated this issue. The longitudinal study period of 1990-2004 mirros the study period of state rules on this issue which was undertaken in the first article. The study period was chosen for an explicit substantive rationale that was explained in that article and is repeated in this article. Because both articles are decade and one-half studies they will …

Summary Of Bass-Davis V. Davis, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 39, Charles R. Cordova, Jr.

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

No abstract provided.

Zoning And Eminent Domain Under The New Minimum Scrutiny, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

Recently the Supreme Court has made it clearer that minimum scrutiny is a factual analysis. Whether in any government action there is a rational relation to a legitimate interest is a matter of determining whether there is a policy maintaining important facts. This has come about in the Court’s emerging emphasis on developing fact-based criteria for determining government purpose. Thus, those who want to affect zoning and eminent domain outcomes should look to what the Court sees as important facts, and whether government action is maintaining those facts with its proposed land use or eminent domain action.

Yissacharov V. Chief Military Prosecutor, Dorit Beinisch, Aharon Barak, Eliezer Rivlin, Ayala Procaccia, Edmond E. Levy, Miriam Naor, Salim Joubran, Mishael Cheshin, Asher Grunis

Translated Opinions

Facts: While being admitted into prison for being absent from the army without leave, the appellant was found to have a dangerous drug in his possession. When he was interrogated about this, the interrogator failed to advise the appellant that he had a right to consult a lawyer. This omission, which was omitted by the prosecution, was held by the trial court to have been illegal and intentional. In the course of the interrogation, the appellant confessed that he had, on three occasions while he was a soldier, made use of dangerous drugs.

The appellant argued that the confession should …

To Catch A Sex Thief: The Burden Of Performance In Rape And Sexual Assault Trials, Corey Rayburn Yung

ExpressO

Despite decades of efforts to reform American rape law, prosecution and conviction rates remain low compared to similar crimes. While activists led legislatures to adopt important statutory changes for rape and sexual assault, only modest effects in the levels of sexual violence have been observed. Nonetheless, reform-minded scholars continue to focus on statutory and rule tinkering as a means to quell sexual violence.

This article argues against the commonly-held belief that the crucial factors in determining the outcome of rape trials are substantive and procedural in nature. Rather, the issues of performance, representation, and language often pre-determine the outcomes of …

Finding New Constitutional Rights Through The Supreme Court’S Evolving “Government Purpose” Test Under Minimum Scrutiny, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

By now we all are familiar with the litany of cases which refused to find elevated scrutiny for so-called “affirmative” or “social” rights such as education, welfare or housing: Lindsey v. Normet, San Antonio School District v. Rodriguez, Dandridge v. Williams, DeShaney v. Winnebago County. There didn’t seem to be anything in minimum scrutiny which could protect such facts as education or housing, from government action. However, unobtrusively and over the years, the Supreme Court has clarified and articulated one aspect of minimum scrutiny which holds promise for vindicating facts. You will recall that under minimum scrutiny government’s action is …

Using Capture Theory And Chronology In Eminent Domain Proceedings, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

Capture theory--in which private purpose is substituted for government purpose--sheds light on a technique which is coming into greater use post-Kelo v. New London. That case affirmed that eminent domain use need only be rationally related to a legitimate government purpose. Capture theory focuses litigators' attention on "government purpose." That is a question of fact for the trier of fact. This article shows how to use civil discovery in order to show the Court that private purpose has been substituted for government purpose. If it has, the eminent domain use fails, because the use does not meet minimum scrutiny. This …

Same Old, Same Old: Scientific Evidence Past And Present, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

For over twenty years, and particularly since the Supreme Court's Daubert' decision in 1993, much ink has been spilled debating the problem of scientific evidence in the courts. Are jurors or, in the alternative, judges qualified to assess scientific reliability? Do courts really need to be concerned about "junk science"? What mechanisms can promote better decision making in scientific cases? Even a cursory scan of the literature shows the recent explosion of interest in these issues, precipitating new treatises, hundreds of articles, and countless conferences for judges, practitioners, and academics.

Same Old, Same Old: Scientific Evidence Past And Present, Edward K. Cheng

Michigan Law Review

For over twenty years, and particularly since the Supreme Court's Daubert decision in 1993, much ink has been spilled debating the problem of scientific evidence in the courts. Are jurors or, in the alternative, judges qualified to assess scientific reliability? Do courts really need to be concerned about "junk science"? What mechanisms can promote better decision making in scientific cases? Even a cursory scan of the literature shows the recent explosion of interest in these issues, precipitating new treatises, hundreds of articles, and countless conferences for judges, practitioners, and academics. To this literature, Professor Tal Golan adds Laws of Men …

The Case For Selective Abolition Of The Rules Of Evidence, David Crump

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

"Why Don't You Take Another Look At Number Three?": Investigator Knowledge And Its Effects On Eyewitness Confidence And Identification Decisions, Melissa B. Russano, Jason J. Dickinson, Sarah M. Greathouse, Margaret Bull Kovera

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article examines the impact of investigator knowledge on eyewitness identification and confidence, highlighting the potential for bias and the importance of implementing double-blind lineup procedures to mitigate such influences. It emphasizes the need for further research and policy changes to enhance the reliability of eyewitness testimony.

Eyewitness Identification, Democratic Deliberation, And The Politics Of Science, Andrew E. Taslitz

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article examines the intersection of social science and legal policy in eyewitness identification, focusing on the role of prosecutors and the American Bar Association (ABA) Eyewitness Resolution. It argues that while social science provides critical insights to improve identification accuracy, the translation of these insights into legal policy involves normative judgments that balance competing values, such as protecting the innocent and ensuring public safety. The author critiques the limitations of internal deliberative processes within law enforcement and prosecutorial offices, advocating for more transparent and inclusive deliberative structures to address systemic errors and promote justice.

Reforming Eyewitness Identification: Cautionary Lineup Instructions; Weighing The Advantages And Disadvantages Of Show-Ups Versus Lineups, Nancy K. Mehrkens Steblay

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article argues that the structure and instructions of eyewitness identification procedures significantly influence accuracy, with a focus on the advantages of cautious lineup instructions and the comparative effectiveness of lineups versus show-ups. It emphasizes that subtle changes in lineup instructions can reduce false identifications and improve reliability, while show-ups present unique challenges despite their practical benefits.

Improving Eyewitness Identifications: Hennepin County's Blind Sequential Lineup Pilot Project, Amy Klobuchar, Nancy K. Mehrkens Steblay, Hilary Lindell Caligiuri

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article examines the effectiveness of Hennepin County's blind sequential lineup pilot project in improving eyewitness identification accuracy. By implementing a protocol where photos are shown one at a time by an administrator unaware of the suspect, the study aims to reduce misidentifications and enhance the reliability of eyewitness testimony in criminal investigations.

Confrontation, Equity, And The Misnamed Exception For "Forfeiture" By Wrongdoing, James F. Flanagan

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

What Do Snowmobiles, Mercury Emissions, Greenhouse Gases, And Runoff Have In Common?: The Controversy Over "Junk Science", Linda A. Malone

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Introduction, Barry Scheck

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The symposium aims to reform eyewitness identification procedures by fostering dialogue between law enforcement, social scientists, and legal experts. It seeks to address the high rates of mistaken identifications and improve the accuracy and reliability of eyewitness testimony through scientific research and practical implementations. The event highlights the human impact of wrongful convictions and explores evidence-based solutions to prevent such injustices.

A Sample Of Witness, Crime, And Perpetrator Characteristics Affecting Eyewitness Identification Accuracy, Brian L. Cutler

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article examines the impact of estimator variables on eyewitness identification accuracy, focusing on six key factors: own-race bias, exposure duration, masking of hair and hairline cues, weapon focus, eyewitness stress, and passage of time. It argues that these variables significantly influence identification accuracy and are not merely matters of common sense, emphasizing the need for expert testimony and education for legal professionals.

Keynote Address: Reforming Eyewitness Identification, Thomas P. Sullivan

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article addresses the critical issue of eyewitness identification errors in criminal investigations, highlighting their role in wrongful convictions. It advocates for reform through improved identification procedures, particularly the sequential lineup method, and emphasizes the need for public and professional education on the fallibility of eyewitness testimony.

Detailing Daubert, The Hon. E Richard Webber, Dana M. Malkus

All Faculty Scholarship

When Justice Blackmun wrote Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), the assignment was to reconcile the standards governing the admissibility of expert testimony with Federal Rule of Evidence 702. As Justice Blackmun recognized, Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), had long served as the polestar for determining the admissibility of expert testimony in litigation. Although the test developed by the Frye court was ultimately rejected when the Supreme Court announced new rules regarding the admissibility of expert testimony, the Frye court’s recognition of the purpose behind admitting expert testimony remains instructional: …