Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Evidence Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Discipline
Institution
Keyword
Publication Year
Publication
Publication Type
File Type

Articles 3511 - 3540 of 5952

Full-Text Articles in Evidence

The Big Chill: Third-Party Documents And The Reporter's Privilege, Bradley S. Miller Jan 1996

The Big Chill: Third-Party Documents And The Reporter's Privilege, Bradley S. Miller

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In the wake of Philip Morris' multi-billion dollar libel suit against ABC, a Virginia court has sanctioned a new method of discovery that promises to have an unsettling impact on the reporter's privilege to protect confidential sources. In Philip Morris Cos. v. American Broadcasting Cos., the tobacco giant moved to compel disclosure of the identity of a former R.J. Reynolds manager who suggested on ABC's Day One news program that tobacco companies add nicotine to the cigarettes they manufacture. At the same time, Philip Morris issued subpoenas for the expense records of two ABC employees who wrote and produced …


Rule 405: Methods Of Proving Character Jan 1996

Rule 405: Methods Of Proving Character

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 407: Subsequent Remedial Measures Jan 1996

Rule 407: Subsequent Remedial Measures

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 412: Sex Offense Cases; Relevance Of Alleged Victim's Past Sexual Behavior Or Alleged Sexual Disposition Jan 1996

Rule 412: Sex Offense Cases; Relevance Of Alleged Victim's Past Sexual Behavior Or Alleged Sexual Disposition

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 702: Testimony By Experts Jan 1996

Rule 702: Testimony By Experts

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 704: Opinion On Ultimate Issue Jan 1996

Rule 704: Opinion On Ultimate Issue

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 801(D)(1): Prior Statement By Witness Jan 1996

Rule 801(D)(1): Prior Statement By Witness

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 803(3): Then Existing Mental, Emotional, Or Physical Condition Jan 1996

Rule 803(3): Then Existing Mental, Emotional, Or Physical Condition

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 803(4): Statements For Purposes Of Medical Diagnosis Or Treatment Jan 1996

Rule 803(4): Statements For Purposes Of Medical Diagnosis Or Treatment

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


A Comparison And Analysis Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence And New York Evidentiary Law, The Editors Jan 1996

A Comparison And Analysis Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence And New York Evidentiary Law, The Editors

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 803(18): Learned Treatises Jan 1996

Rule 803(18): Learned Treatises

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 408: Compromise And Offers To Compromise Jan 1996

Rule 408: Compromise And Offers To Compromise

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 901: Requirement Of Authentication Or Identification Jan 1996

Rule 901: Requirement Of Authentication Or Identification

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Admissibility Of Dna Evidence Jan 1996

Admissibility Of Dna Evidence

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 1001: The "Original Document" Rule Jan 1996

Rule 1001: The "Original Document" Rule

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 601: General Rule Of Competency Jan 1996

Rule 601: General Rule Of Competency

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 803(1): Present Sense Impression Jan 1996

Rule 803(1): Present Sense Impression

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 804(B)(1): Former Testimony Jan 1996

Rule 804(B)(1): Former Testimony

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Rule 803(8)(C): Public Records And Reports Jan 1996

Rule 803(8)(C): Public Records And Reports

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Text, Texts, Or Ad Hoc Determinations: Interpretation Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Randolph N. Jonakait Jan 1996

Text, Texts, Or Ad Hoc Determinations: Interpretation Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Randolph N. Jonakait

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.


Daubert And The Quest For Value-Free "Scientific Knowledge" In The Courtroom, Alexander Morgan Capron Jan 1996

Daubert And The Quest For Value-Free "Scientific Knowledge" In The Courtroom, Alexander Morgan Capron

University of Richmond Law Review

In a world that grows more technologically complex every day and in which scientific research continually expands both our understanding of, and our questions about, the operation of the natural and man-made world, it is hardly surprising that science should show up with increasing frequency in our court-rooms. Science itself is sometimes at issue, for example, in proceedings on allegations of scientific misconduct or in disputes over the ownership or patentability of technologies. But more frequently, science enters in aid of resolving a case in which a complex question of causation is at issue. To establish or rebut causation, each …


Misconceptions And Reevaluation–Polygraph Admissibility After Rock And Daubert, James R. Mccall Jan 1996

Misconceptions And Reevaluation–Polygraph Admissibility After Rock And Daubert, James R. Mccall

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Character Evidence Issues In The O.J. Simpson Case–Or, Rationales Of The Character Evidence Ban, With Illustrations From The Simpson Case, Roger C. Park Jan 1996

Character Evidence Issues In The O.J. Simpson Case–Or, Rationales Of The Character Evidence Ban, With Illustrations From The Simpson Case, Roger C. Park

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


The Syndromic Lawyer Syndrome: A Psychological Theory Of Evidentiary Munificence, David L. Faigman Jan 1996

The Syndromic Lawyer Syndrome: A Psychological Theory Of Evidentiary Munificence, David L. Faigman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


The Risks Of Death: Why Erroneous Convictions Are Common In Capital Cases (Symposium: The New York Death Penalty In Context), Samuel R. Gross Jan 1996

The Risks Of Death: Why Erroneous Convictions Are Common In Capital Cases (Symposium: The New York Death Penalty In Context), Samuel R. Gross

Articles

As the Supreme Court has said, time and again, death is different: It is "different in kind from any other punishment imposed under our system of criminal justice;"1 it "differs more from life imprisonment than a 100-year sentence differs from one of only a year or two;"' 2 and so forth. Traditionally, this observation has justified special procedural protections for capital defendants. Justice Harlan put it nicely nearly forty years ago: "I do not concede that whatever process is 'due' an offender faced with a fine or a prison sentence necessarily satisfies the requirements of the Constitution in a capital …


Making The Law Safe For Science: A Proposed Rule For The Admission Of Expert Testimony, David L. Faigman Jan 1996

Making The Law Safe For Science: A Proposed Rule For The Admission Of Expert Testimony, David L. Faigman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Restrictions On Law Enforcement Investigation And Prosecution Of Crime, Paul Marcus Jan 1996

Restrictions On Law Enforcement Investigation And Prosecution Of Crime, Paul Marcus

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


Introduction: O.J. Simpson And The Criminal Justice System On Trial, Christopher B. Mueller Jan 1996

Introduction: O.J. Simpson And The Criminal Justice System On Trial, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.


Discovering Who We Are: An English Perspective On The Simpson Trial, William T. Pizzi Jan 1996

Discovering Who We Are: An English Perspective On The Simpson Trial, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.


Assessing Evidence, Richard D. Friedman Jan 1996

Assessing Evidence, Richard D. Friedman

Reviews

David A. Schum's Evidential Foundations of Probabilistic Reasoning, 2 C.G.G. Aitken's Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists,3 and Bernard Robertson and G.A. Vignaux's Interpreting Evidence: Evaluating Forensic Science in the Courtroom4 all have something to tell us about how to use and evaluate evidence. Although the books are addressed to different primary audiences5 and their authors come from a variety of disciplines and from distant points of the English-speaking world,6 all three help draw the connection between underlying theory and presentation in the courtroom. Though Schum uses numerous examples from litigation and discusses the legal literature of …