Evidence Commons^™

Paradoxes, Gedanken Experiments And The Burden Of Proof: A Response To Dr. Cohen's Reply, David H. Kaye

Faculty Scholarship

This article responds to L. Jonathan Cohen's critique of the author's position regarding the problem of naked statistical evidence. Cohen argues that the kind of probability at work in litigation does not conform to the axioms of mathematical probability. The author responds by suggesting that the familiar theory of probability needs no revision to account for the reluctance of a few courts to permit plaintiffs to prevail on the strength of background statistics alone. One need not adopt Dr. Cohen's esoteric mathematical structure to explain the burden of proof in civil cases. The article shows that whether or not one …

The Permissibility Of Impeaching An Alibi Witness With Evidence Of His Pre-Trial Silence: The New York Court Of Appeals Decision In People V. Dawson, Brian T. Edwards

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Upjohn: A New Prescription For The Attorney-Client Privilege And Work Product Defenses In Administrative Investigations, Robert G. Nath

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Grand Jury: A Prosecutor Need Not Present Exculpatory Evidence

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Safeguards Against Suggestiveness: A Means For Admissibility Of Hypno-Induced Testimony

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Income Taxation And The Calculation Of Tort Damage Awards: The Ramifications Of Norfolk & Western Railway V. Liepelt

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Ohio Rules Of Evidence: Part Iv, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Ohio Rules Of Evidence: Part Ii, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Discovery Of Penalties, W. Hamilton Bryson

University of Richmond Law Review

It is a well-established and fundamental principle of justice that no one may be compelled to subject himself to punishments nor to give evidence leading to that result. Nemo tenetur prodere seipsum is an ancient maxim. It was written directly into the Virginia Declaration of Rights in 1776, which states that in all "criminal prosecutions" no one can "be compelled to give evidence against himself." This idea was also incorporated into the United States Constitution in 1791 through the fifth amendment.

Discovery And The Privacy Act: Exemption (B)(11) To The Conditions Of Disclosure: What Qualifies As An "Order Of The Court"?, John W. Williams

University of Richmond Law Review

On December 31, 1974, President Gerald Ford signed the landmark Privacy Act of 1974 into law. One of the key concepts of the Act is the principle of disclosure limitation, which limits the ability of the federal government to disclose the contents of per- sonal records in its possession. In the words of the Senate Governmental Operations Committee, this principle "is designed to pre- vent.., the wrongful disclosure and use of personal files held by Federal agencies."

Mccormick On Evidence And The Concept Of Hearsay: A Critical Analysis Followed By Suggestions To Law Teachers, Roger C. Park

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Abolition Of The Party-Witness Disqualification: An Historical Survey, Joel N. Bodansky

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

A Case For Jury Determination Of Search And Seizure Law, Ronald J. Bacigal

Law Faculty Publications

In a criminal case the option to return a general verdict of acquittal invests the jury with the raw power to nullify many legal determinations, including the trial judge's ruling that a search is constitutional. While courts grudingly acknowledge the existence of an extra-legal jury nullification power, courts do not recognize any jury prerogative to determine the lawfulness of a search. The United States Supreme Court's discussion of the jury's role in interpreting and applying the fourth amendment consists of one terse statement that the legality of a search "is a question of fact and law for the court and …

Capacity To Contest A Search And Seizure: The Passing Of Old Rules And Some Suggestions For New Ones, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Professor Slobogin examines recent Supreme Court decisions involving standing to challenge search and seizure violations, and argues that the Court's commitment to a "totality of the circumstances" approach has permitted erosion of fourth amendment protections. After concluding that these decisions provide little guidance to lower courts, Professor Slobogin offers a set of principles which will aid in analyzing the Court's direction.

Constitutional Law - Privacy - Invasion Of Privacy Justified Where Hospital Records Are Sought For Grand Jury Investigation, Kathleen D. Yesenko

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

The Kutak Model Rules V. The American Lawyer's Code Of Conduct, Monroe H. Freedman

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Perils Of The Rulemaking Process: The Development, Application, And Unconstitutionality Of Rule 804(B)(3)'S Penal Interest Exception, Peter W. Tague

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

As the culmination of a decade of rulemaking, in 1975 Congress enacted the Federal Rules of Evidence, which include in rule 804(b)(3) an exception to the hearsay rule that allows federal courts to admit statements against penal interest. Having reviewed previously unpublished memoranda and nonpublic tape recordings of the deliberations of the Advisory and Standing Committees to the Judicial Conference and the Special Subcommittee on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws of the House Judiciary Committee, Professor Tague explores the development of rule 804(b)(3), one of the more controversial rules that emerged from that rulemaking process. After analyzing rule 804(b)(3) and …

The Federal Rules Of Evidence: Six Years After, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Federal Rules of Evidence have been in effect since 1975. Six years of experience is not much time in which to assess such a complex and important body of law. Nevertheless, there is now some "evidence" of the impact of the Federal Rules on the various states and circuits.

The Rules do seem to have proved successful enough to stimulate widespread imitation. Approximately half the states in the United States have or will very shortly have evidence codes patterned substantially on the Rules, even down to their numbers. Many of the remaining states (e.g., Iowa, Illinois, and Pennsylvania) have …

Constitutional Protection For Private Papers, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Evidence, Hardy Gregory Jr.

Mercer Law Review

There are a number of devices and techniques commonly used for the purpose of producing information to be used as evidence. These devices and techniques are the tools of investigators. The appellate courts of Georgia dealt in an interesting way with several of these tools in the past year, namely, polygraph tests, bloodhounds and blood alcohol tests.

Georgia's Witness Immunity Statute: Explication And Recommendations For Judicial Development, Roald Mykkeltvedt

Mercer Law Review

In 1975 the Georgia General Assembly enacted a comprehensive witness immunity statute' providing for a procedure to obtain the testimony of persons who refuse to testify on self-incrimination grounds. That procedure is summarized in the following excerpt from the act:

Whenever in the judgment of the Attorney General or any district attorney, the testimony of any person or the production of evidence of any kind by any person in any criminal proceeding before a court or grand jury is necessary to the public interest, then the Attorney General or the district attorney may request the superior court, in writing, to …

Prosecutorial Discovery: An Overview, Harry G. Deitzler, Susan Klimas, Walt Auvil

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1980

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pillow Talk, Grimgribbers And Connubial Bliss: The Marital Communication Privilege, Anne N. Deprez

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Inculpatory Declarations Against Penal Interest And The Coconspirator Rule Under The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Diane M. Frye

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Federal Evidence. David W. Louisell & Christopher B. Mueller, Charles R. Coleman

North Carolina Central Law Review

No abstract provided.

Book Review Of A Modern Approach To Evidence And Programmed Materials On Problem In Evidence, James M. Klebba

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Evidentiary Requirements To Prove A Claim For Black Lung Benefits: Impact Of The Black Lung Benefits Reform Act Of 1977, F. Thomas Rubenstein

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Use Of Thermal Analysis In The Identification And Characterization Of Fibers Of Forensic Interest, Ronald J. Coffey

All-Inclusive List of Electronic Theses and Dissertations

This study investigates the use of thermal analysis for the identification and characterization of fibers for forensic purposes. Fibers such as polyesters, polyacrylics, polypropylenes and nylon were investigated by Differential Thermal Analysis (D.T.A.) and Thermogravimetric Analysis (T.G.A.) to see if their resulting thermograms were characteristic of each fiber. Also, infrared analysis was performed on each fiber. In addition, such factors as heating rate and sample size along with fiber blends were studied as to their effect on thermograms. As a result of this study several important conclusions may be drawn. Although it was found that for the most part D.T.A. …

Trammel V. United States, 100 S. Ct. 906 (1980), M. J. Lord

Florida State University Law Review

Evidence-LIMITATION OF THE FEDERAL HUSBAND-WIFE EVIDENTIARY PRIVILEGE