Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Law (1448)
- Criminal Procedure (1358)
- Constitutional Law (947)
- Courts (768)
- Litigation (643)
-
- Civil Procedure (525)
- Science and Technology Law (458)
- State and Local Government Law (452)
- Torts (436)
- Jurisprudence (411)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (411)
- Fourth Amendment (391)
- Supreme Court of the United States (386)
- Judges (374)
- Law and Society (368)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (347)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (343)
- Contracts (334)
- Legislation (334)
- Legal Profession (331)
- Family Law (329)
- Intellectual Property Law (321)
- Administrative Law (320)
- Law and Psychology (316)
- Internet Law (308)
- Medical Jurisprudence (305)
- International Law (298)
- Legal History (297)
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (840)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (380)
- Seattle University School of Law (238)
- West Virginia University (218)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (205)
-
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (174)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (164)
- William & Mary Law School (157)
- University of Richmond (150)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (143)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (137)
- University of Kentucky (133)
- Mercer University School of Law (117)
- University of Washington School of Law (112)
- Cleveland State University (111)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (106)
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law (96)
- Pepperdine University (92)
- University of Miami Law School (91)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (83)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (81)
- American University Washington College of Law (80)
- University of Colorado Law School (80)
- UIC School of Law (78)
- Cornell University Law School (77)
- Fordham Law School (77)
- University of Georgia School of Law (68)
- Duke Law (65)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (63)
- Brooklyn Law School (56)
- Keyword
-
- Evidence (1364)
- Testimony (238)
- Hearsay (223)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (214)
- Admissibility (203)
-
- Witnesses (187)
- Expert testimony (121)
- Discovery (115)
- Criminal law (114)
- Litigation (110)
- Sixth Amendment (106)
- Confrontation Clause (105)
- United States Supreme Court (101)
- Police (87)
- Cross-examination (86)
- Exclusionary rule (85)
- Scientific evidence (84)
- Law (83)
- Expert evidence (81)
- Trials (78)
- Criminal procedure (76)
- Due process (76)
- Criminal Law (73)
- Witness (73)
- Fourth Amendment (71)
- Fifth Amendment (68)
- Constitutional Law (65)
- Daubert (65)
- Juries (64)
- Courts (61)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (542)
- Faculty Scholarship (310)
- Articles (241)
- Seattle University Law Review (230)
- West Virginia Law Review (215)
-
- Cardozo Law Review (210)
- Faculty Publications (198)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (132)
- Indiana Law Journal (131)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (127)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (122)
- Mercer Law Review (117)
- Touro Law Review (115)
- Kentucky Law Journal (109)
- Cleveland State Law Review (98)
- Buffalo Law Review (93)
- University of Richmond Law Review (82)
- Washington Law Review (78)
- Pepperdine Law Review (68)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (67)
- Scholarly Works (64)
- Maryland Law Review (61)
- UIC Law Review (60)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (59)
- University of Miami Law Review (58)
- All Faculty Scholarship (56)
- Nevada Supreme Court Summaries (55)
- Richmond Journal of Law & Technology (51)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (50)
- Akron Law Review (47)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 4201 - 4230 of 5952
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Applying Lawyers' Expertise To Scientific Experts: Some Thoughts About Trial Court Analysis Of The Prejudicial Effects Of Admitting And Excluding Expert Scientific Testimony, James M. Doyle
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Capabilities Of Modern Forensic Laboratories, Irving C. Stone
Capabilities Of Modern Forensic Laboratories, Irving C. Stone
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Scientific Evidence And The Question Of Judicial Capacity, John W. Wesley
Scientific Evidence And The Question Of Judicial Capacity, John W. Wesley
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Seeing Can Be Deceiving: Photographic Evidence In A Visual Age - How Much Weight Does It Deserve?, Benjamin V. Madison Iii
Seeing Can Be Deceiving: Photographic Evidence In A Visual Age - How Much Weight Does It Deserve?, Benjamin V. Madison Iii
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Second Look At The North Carolina Fair Sentencing Act, Richard J. Anderson
A Second Look At The North Carolina Fair Sentencing Act, Richard J. Anderson
North Carolina Central Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Use Of Suppression Hearing Testimony To Impeach, Morgan G. Graham
The Use Of Suppression Hearing Testimony To Impeach, Morgan G. Graham
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Hypnotically Refreshed Testimony: In Support Of The Emerging Majority And People V. Hughes, Paul G. Harnisch
Hypnotically Refreshed Testimony: In Support Of The Emerging Majority And People V. Hughes, Paul G. Harnisch
Buffalo Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Battering Parent Syndrome: Inexpert Testimony As Character Evidence, Thomas N. Bulleit Jr.
The Battering Parent Syndrome: Inexpert Testimony As Character Evidence, Thomas N. Bulleit Jr.
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Note proposes that courts refuse to give further consideration to admitting the battering parent syndrome as evidence in both civil and criminal proceedings arising out of child abuse. Part I of the Note describes the syndrome as it appears in the psychological literature. Part II suggests that current judicial attitudes favor the future admissibility of the syndrome, conditioned only on an improved showing of scientific accuracy. Part III demonstrates that regardless of scientific accuracy, the character evidence rule forbids courts from admitting the battering parent syndrome. Part IV argues that the important policies underlying the character evidence rule override …
Introduction: Trends And Developments With Respect To That Amendment 'Central To Enjoyment Of Other Guarantees Of The Bill Of Rights', Yale Kamisar
Articles
Seventy years ago, in the famous Weeks case,' the Supreme Court evoked a storm of controversy by promulgating the federal exclusionary rule. When, a half-century later, in the landmark Mapp case,2 the Court extended the Weeks rule to state criminal proceedings, at least one experienced observer assumed that the controversy "today finds its end." 3 But as we all know now, Mapp only intensified the controversy. Indeed, in recent years spirited debates over proposals to modify the exclusionary rule or to scrap it entirely have filled the air - and the law reviews.'
Fairness Vs. Trustworthiness: The Predecessor In Interest Controversy Of Rule 804(B)(L), Allen D. Haynie
Fairness Vs. Trustworthiness: The Predecessor In Interest Controversy Of Rule 804(B)(L), Allen D. Haynie
BYU Law Review
No abstract provided.
Evidentiary Problems In--And Solutions For--The Uniform Commercial Code, Ronald J. Allen, Robert A. Hillman
Evidentiary Problems In--And Solutions For--The Uniform Commercial Code, Ronald J. Allen, Robert A. Hillman
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
The Uniform Commercial Code does not offer a systematic approach to the rules governing the evidentiary relationships of parties to commercial litigation. In this article, Professors Allen and Hillman present a general analytical approach to proof rules, highlight the shortcomings of the Code's evidentiary provisions, and discuss the inevitable confusion in the case law construing the Code. They propose an amendment to the Code designed to clarify and improve the Code approach.
Mary Beth G. V. City Of Chicago: How Reasonable Can A Strip Search Be, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 237 (1984), Frank C. Lipuma
Mary Beth G. V. City Of Chicago: How Reasonable Can A Strip Search Be, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 237 (1984), Frank C. Lipuma
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
“Other Acts” Evidence, Paul C. Giannelli
Inculpatory Statements Against Penal Interest: State V. Parris Goes Too Far, James E. Beaver, Cheryl Mccleary
Inculpatory Statements Against Penal Interest: State V. Parris Goes Too Far, James E. Beaver, Cheryl Mccleary
Seattle University Law Review
This article first demonstrates that courts historically did not trust penal interest statements in general, and that courts were extremely suspicious of any statements by a third party that implicated the defendant. Since Washington adopted Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3) verbatim, this article then analyzes the legislative history of the rule. The article concludes that the legislative history favored exclusion of inculpatory statements but that Congress failed to codify the exclusion because of unrelated problems. Finally, the article discusses the confrontation clause problems that arise when inculpatory statements are allowed into evidence. This article argues that the Parris holding should …
New Hearsay Exceptions For A Child's Statement Of Sexual Abuse, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (1984), Glen Skoler
New Hearsay Exceptions For A Child's Statement Of Sexual Abuse, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (1984), Glen Skoler
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Admitting Computer Generated Records: A Presumption Of Reliability, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 115 (1984), Peter M. Storm
Admitting Computer Generated Records: A Presumption Of Reliability, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 115 (1984), Peter M. Storm
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Discovery In Kentucky: An Overview, Richard H. Underwood
Discovery In Kentucky: An Overview, Richard H. Underwood
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Jackson V. Virginia: Reopening The Pandora's Box Of The Legal Sufficiency Of Drug Identification Evidence, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Jackson V. Virginia: Reopening The Pandora's Box Of The Legal Sufficiency Of Drug Identification Evidence, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
The Fifth Amendment Privilege And Documents--Cutting Fisher's Tangled Line, Robert Heidt
The Fifth Amendment Privilege And Documents--Cutting Fisher's Tangled Line, Robert Heidt
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
Kentucky Law Survey: Evidence, Newton B. Fowler Iii
Kentucky Law Survey: Evidence, Newton B. Fowler Iii
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Evaluating The Expert: Judicial Expectations Of Expert Opinion Evidence In Child Placement Adjudications, Jane W. Ellis
Evaluating The Expert: Judicial Expectations Of Expert Opinion Evidence In Child Placement Adjudications, Jane W. Ellis
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Commissioning Morallity: An Introduction To The Symposium, Alan J. Weisbard, John D. Arras
Commissioning Morallity: An Introduction To The Symposium, Alan J. Weisbard, John D. Arras
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Admissibility Of Prior-Action Depositions And Formertestimony Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(A)(4) Andfed. R. Evid. 804(B)(1): Courts Differinginterpretations, J. Randall Coffey
Admissibility Of Prior-Action Depositions And Formertestimony Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(A)(4) Andfed. R. Evid. 804(B)(1): Courts Differinginterpretations, J. Randall Coffey
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Federal Coconspirator Exception: Action, Assertion, And Hearsay, Christopher B. Mueller
The Federal Coconspirator Exception: Action, Assertion, And Hearsay, Christopher B. Mueller
Publications
No abstract provided.
The Use Of Scientific Evidence In Rape Prosecutions, John T. Tucker Iii
The Use Of Scientific Evidence In Rape Prosecutions, John T. Tucker Iii
University of Richmond Law Review
Rape is defined as "unlawful sexual intercourse with a female without her consent." The crime has three basic elements: lack of consent, penetration, and identification of the assailant. Successful rape prosecutions are increasingly utilizing scientific evidence to investigate and prove the elements of rape. The purpose of this paper is to explore the many uses of scientific evidence with an eye towards providing a useful checklist to aid attorneys involved in a rape prosecution.
Rethinking Self-Incrimination In Great Britain, Mark Berger
Rethinking Self-Incrimination In Great Britain, Mark Berger
Faculty Works
No abstract provided.
Admissibility Of Laboratory Reports, Paul C. Giannelli
Admissibility Of Laboratory Reports, Paul C. Giannelli
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Winfield V. Commonwealth: The Application Of The Virginia Rape Shield Statute, Philip L. Hatchett
Winfield V. Commonwealth: The Application Of The Virginia Rape Shield Statute, Philip L. Hatchett
University of Richmond Law Review
In Winfield v. Commonwealth, the Virginia Supreme Court held that the state's recently enacted rape shield statute could not restrict or infringe upon the defendant's sixth amendment right under the United States Constitution to confront his accusers. In overruling the trial judge, the court stated that section 18.2-67.7 of the Code of Virginia actually expanded the admissibility of evidence related to specific prior sexual conduct of the prosecutrix. By this ruling, Virginia has joined a minority of jurisdictions which have refused to recognize the special dilemma of the prosecutrix in a rape trial and to grant additional protections under her …
Admissibility Of Written Standards As Evidence Of The Standard Of Care In Medical And Hospital Negligence Actions In Virginia, Gwen M. Schockemoehl
Admissibility Of Written Standards As Evidence Of The Standard Of Care In Medical And Hospital Negligence Actions In Virginia, Gwen M. Schockemoehl
University of Richmond Law Review
The standard of care in a medical negligence action represents the duty which the defendant physician, nurse, hospital or other health care provider owes to the patient. In Virginia, it is that degree of care and skill possessed by the reasonably prudent practitioner of the same specialty in this state. This standard is an elusive one at best. While learned treatises and journal articles assist in determining the standard, in practice the plaintiff offers experts who state, based on their knowledge, training, and experience that the standard of care requires the defendant to provide a particular type of care which …