Evidence Commons^™

The Objection Exception Is Overruled! The Georgia Supreme Court Makes A Course Correction By Reviving The Contemporaneous Objection Rule, Ryan Read

Mercer Law Review

What comes to mind when you think of evidence being presented at jury trials? Typically, both sides prevent evidence to the jury, and both sides fight hard to make sure no prejudicial evidence is allowed in that would bias the jury against their client. Both sides also work hard to prepare persuasive openings and closings to further affect the jury’s perception of their client, the opposition, and the evidence that has been presented. So, when an attorney on one side makes prejudicial statements about the opposing counsel’s client, one would naturally expect an objection to be made, right? Well, in …

The Future Of Testamentary Capacity, Reid Kress Weisbord, David Horton

Washington and Lee Law Review

Recently, the #FreeBritney saga cast a harsh spotlight on state guardianship systems. Yet despite their serious flaws, guardianship regimes have benefited from waves of reform. Indeed, since the 1970s, most jurisdictions have taken steps to protect the autonomy of people with cognitive, intellectual, or developmental disabilities (CIDD). Likewise, lawmakers are currently experimenting with supported decision-making (SDM): an alternative to guardianship designed to help individuals with CIDD make their own choices. These changes are no panacea, but they have modernized a field that once summarily denied “idiots” and “lunatics” power over their affairs.

However, in a related context, the legal system’s …

The Computer Got It Wrong: Facial Recognition Technology And Establishing Probable Cause To Arrest, T.J. Benedict

Washington and Lee Law Review

Facial recognition technology (FRT) is a popular tool among police, who use it to identify suspects using photographs or still-images from videos. The technology is far from perfect. Recent studies highlight that many FRT systems are less effective at identifying people of color, women, older people, and children. These race, gender, and age biases arise because FRT is often “trained” using non-diverse faces. As a result, police have wrongfully arrested Black men based on mistaken FRT identifications. This Note explores the intersection of facial recognition technology and probable cause to arrest.

Courts rarely, if ever, examine FRT’s role in establishing …

Saidi Banda V The People Scz Appeal No. 114 Of 2015), Mwaka Chizinga

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Introduction To Symposium Issue: Military Veterans And The Law, Timothy E. Lynch

Faculty Works

Upon discharge from the military, veterans must transition from living and working in the military to fully integrating into the civilian world. At a minimum, this means veterans must heal their physical and psychological wounds, find adequate housing, maintain healthy familial relationships, access necessary healthcare, and secure stable civilian employment. Although these needs are often wrought with legal complexities, veterans are often miscategorized and misunderstood by the legal community. This Symposium seeks to understand and address some of these legal issues, and the UMKC Law Review is proud to be publishing several pieces from prominent legal scholars with expertise in …

Duty To Rescue In The Digital Age: A Comparative Analysis, Cameron Kellett

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

The article advocates for the enactment of state legislation establishing a duty-to-rescue doctrine, arguing that the absence of such a legal duty leads to preventable harm and undermines societal solidarity. It critiques the arbitrary nature of the special relationship exception under current law and proposes Minnesota's duty-to-rescue statute as a model for reform. The analysis emphasizes that requiring bystanders to provide reasonable assistance, without endangering themselves, is both feasible and morally justifiable, as it aligns with human tendencies to help others in distress.

Proving Racism: Gibson Bros. Inc. V. Oberlin College And The Implications On Defamation Law, Liam H. Mcmillin

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Empowering The Defense To Confront The Government's Powers: Virginia Criminal Justice Legal Reform, Bryan Kennedy, Catherine F. Zagurskie

Richmond Public Interest Law Review

During the 2021 Session and 2021 Special Session, Virginia took steps to

restore the balance between individuals ensnared in the criminal legal system

and the government. These new laws allow people who are involved in

the criminal legal system to emphasize their humanity and to hold the government

to its various burdens at all stages of the case, including pre-trial,

trials, sentencing, and appeal. This article discusses four of the most important

changes to Virginia law that ensure a more level playing field between

the government and the accused.

First, eliminating the presumption against bail challenges the government’s

power of …

The Dignitary Confrontation Clause, Erin Sheley

Washington Law Review

For seventeen years, the Supreme Court’s Confrontation Clause jurisprudence has been confused and confusing. In Crawford v. Washington (2004), the Court overruled prior precedent and held that “testimonial” out-of-court statements could not be admitted at trial unless the defendant had an opportunity to cross-examine the declarant, even when the statement would be otherwise admissible as particularly reliable under an exception to the rule against hearsay. In a series of contradictory opinions over the next several years, the Court proceeded to expand and then seemingly roll back this holding, leading to widespread chaos in common types of cases, particularly those involving …

State Spoliation Claims In Federal District Courts, Jeffrey A. Parness

Catholic University Law Review

The increasing amounts of electronically stored information (ESI) relevant to civil litigation, and the ease of their loss, caused federal lawmakers explicitly to address the possible consequences of certain pre-suit or post-suit ESI losses. These lawmakers acted in both 2006 and 2015 through Federal Civil Procedure (FRCP) 37(e). But they acted only on certain ESI. Their actions have prompted increasing attention to the significant risks of pre-suit and post-suit losses of all ESI, and of non-ESI, otherwise discoverable in civil actions. In addition, their actions have spurred increasing attention to the availability of substantive law claims involving spoliation of information …

The Consensus Rule: A New Approach To Scientific Evidence, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Founded on good intentions but unrealistic expectations, the dominant Daubert framework for handling expert and scientific evidence should be scrapped. Daubert asks judges and jurors to make substantively expert determinations, a task they are epistemically incompetent to perform as laypersons. As an alternative, this Article proposes a new framework for handling expert evidence. It draws from the social and philosophical literature on expertise and begins with a basic question: How can laypersons make intelligent decisions about expert topics? From there, it builds its evidentiary approach, which ultimately results in an inference rule focused on expert communities. Specifically, when dealing with …

The Living Rules Of Evidence, G. Alexander Nunn

Faculty Scholarship

The jurisprudential evolution of evidence law is dead. At least, that’s what we’re expected to believe. Ushered in on the wings of a growing positivist movement, the enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence purported to quell judicial authority over evidence law. Instead, committees, conferences, and members of Congress would regulate any change to our evidentiary regime, thereby capturing the evolution of evidence law in a single, transparent code.

The codification of evidence law, though, has proven problematic. The arrival of the Federal Rules of Evidence has given rise to a historically anomalous era of relative stagnation in the doctrinal …

Credibility In Empirical Legal Analysis, Hillel J. Bavli

Brooklyn Law Review

Empirical analysis is central in both legal scholarship and litigation, but it is not credible. Researchers can manipulate data to arrive at any conclusion they wish to obtain. A practice known as data fishing—searching for and selectively reporting methods and results that are favorable to the researcher—entirely invalidates a study’s results by giving rise to false positives and false impressions. Nevertheless, it is prevalent in law, leading to false claims, incorrect verdicts, and destructive policy. In this article, I examine the harm that data fishing in empirical legal research causes. I then build on methods in the sciences to develop …

Judicial Federalism And The Appropriate Role Of The State Supreme Courts: A 20-Year (2000–2020) Study Of These Courts’ Interest Evaluations Of The Fruits And The Attenuation Doctrines, Dannye R. Holley Mr.

St. Mary's Law Journal

The current composition of the United States Supreme Court increases the probability that the Court will be more likely to side with the government with respect to identifying, evaluating, and reconciling the interest of the government versus those of the people when issues of “policing” reach the high court. This opens the door for state supreme court to independently assess individually and collectively these seemingly competing interests and potentially provide greater protections to the interest of the people.

This Article is a twenty-year study of dozens of state supreme court decisions made during the period of 2000–2020. The decisions focused …

The "Unfairness" Proof: Exposing The Fatal Flaw Hidden In The Rule Governing The Use Of Criminal Convictions To Impeach Character For Truthfulness, Robert Steinbuch

Pepperdine Law Review

Federal Rule of Evidence 609 (adopted by various states as well) allows for the introduction of certain convictions at trial to impeach the credibility— i.e., character for truthfulness—of any witness. The rule bifurcates its requirements between those that apply to criminal defendants—who, in theory, are afforded greater protection throughout the law than are all other participants in trials—and all remaining witnesses. The most important distinction between the standards that apply to these two classes of witnesses is that for prior crimes of criminal defendants to be introduced to impeach their credibility, those wrongdoings must survive a special balancing test spelled …

(Partial) Clarity: Eliminating The Confusion About The Regulation Of The "Fact"Ual Bases For Expert Testimony Under The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Edward J. Imwinkelried

William & Mary Law Review

Expert testimony is offered at the vast majority of trials in courts of general jurisdiction in the United States. Federal Rules of Evidence 702-06 govern the admissibility of such testimony. In its May 15, 2021, report accompanying the most recent proposed amendment to Rule 702, the Advisory Committee on the Evidence Rules asserts that “many courts” have misapplied Rule 702 by holding that questions as to whether “the expert has relied on sufficient facts or data ... are questions of weight and not admissibility.” Rule 702(b) states that to be admissible, an expert opinion must be “based on sufficient fact …

Path To Publication: A Peer Mentorship Model For Student-Lead Surgical Research, Usama Waqar, Hareem Rauf, Muskaan Abdul Qadir, Hina Inam

Medical College Documents

Early and sustained involvement in research is imperative for medical students to ensure better career prospects in addition to provision of high-quality, evidence-based care to patients. However, involvement of students in surgical research still remains limited, owing to inadequate research training. The current paper was planned to describe the structure of the "Path to Publication" series, incorporating peer mentorship with capacity-building research workshops for medical students. A total of 25 students were grouped into 8 surgical subspecialty groups to conduct research, supervised by experienced student research and faculty mentors. In addition, a series of research workshops were organized in synchronization …

Omar Effendi Vs. Union Fenosa: Corruption As A Transnational Public Policy Consideration, Ahmed Badr Eldin

Theses and Dissertations

At the beginning of 2011, Egypt witnessed radical political developments that led to the emergence of a pressing tendency to adjudicate the collapsed regime’s policies and practices. Shortly thereafter, the Egyptian State Council issued a number of judicial decisions that confirmed that the sale of the privatized governmental enterprises had been tainted by corruption. Crucially, the Court maintained that flagrant breach of law, regulations, and administrative orders that encompassed these transactions created serious suspicions about corruption committed by public officials and investors. It concluded that the existence of corruption, as a transnational public policy consideration, had deprived foreign investors of …

Dna Exonerations And Stakeholder Responses: A Case Of Cognitive Dissonance, Anne Richardson Oakes, Julian Killingley

Tennessee Law Review

The availability of DNA testing developed in the 1980s transformed the ability of prosecutors to secure convictions while providing Innocence Projects with the tools to overturn them. However, DNA exonerations which establish conclusively that a person convicted of a crime is in fact innocent, can represent a major threat to the value systems and therefore the self-belief of stakeholders who acted in good faith and in the genuine but mistaken belief that the exoneree was guilty. This Article reports on the findings of an investigation into stakeholder responses to DNA exonerations between 1990-1999 when DNA evidence was new and more …

Passcodes, Protection, And Legal Practicality: The Necessity Of A Digital Fifth Amendment, Ethan Swierczewski

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

No abstract provided.

Foreword To The Symposium, The Death Of Eyewitness Testimony And The Rise Of Machine, Jane Campbell Moriarty, Erin Mccluan

Duquesne Law Review

Artificial intelligence, machine evidence, and complex technical evidence are replacing human-skill-based evidence in the courtroom. This may be an improvement on mistaken eyewitness identification and unreliable forensic science evidence, which are both causes of wrongful convictions. Thus, the move toward more machine- based evidence, such as DNA, biometric identification, cell service location information, neuroimaging, and other specialties may provide better evidence. But with such evidence comes different problems, including concerns about proper cross-examination and confrontation, reliability, inscrutability, human bias, constitutional concerns, and both philosophic and ethical questions.

What Machines Can Teach Us About "Confrontation", Andrea Roth

Duquesne Law Review

In this short Article, I argue that treating non-human conveyances of information-and other forms of evidence that cannot be cross-examined-as beyond the Confrontation Clause is unsatisfactory as a matter of text, history, logic, and principle. Instead, all of these clues lead to one conclusion: the right of confrontation is a right not only to physical presence of certain human witnesses to facilitate demeanor review and questioning, but to a meaningful opportunity to scrutinize the government's proof, whatever its form.⁸ That right would include out-of-court discovery of critical contextual information about the evidence, whether or not exculpatory, and a …

The Inscrutability Problem: From First-Generation Forensic Science To Neuroimaging Evidence, Jane Campbell Moriarty

Duquesne Law Review

Expert testimony continues to turn away from human-based skills to embrace machine-based evidence. Technology is used to identify and locate individuals, unlock encrypted devices, and even to evaluate criminal responsibility. Perhaps this is a positive change. The shortcomings of first-generation forensic identification specialties are substantial and include the inscrutability of its subjective comparisons. As such, this newer generation of evidence may well be an improvement. Yet the inscrutability problem adopts many forms. Machine-based evidence relies on hardware, software, algorithms, statistics, and engineering to reach results-ones created and interpreted by humans subject to bias and cognitive error; results the justice system …

Technology - Revealing Or Framing The Truth? A Jurisprudential Debate, Dana Neacsu

Duquesne Law Review

Technology is so much more than a prosthetic. But how much more? And what else is it? In the legal realm, its role is not yet clear. Such a lack of elucidation becomes problematic, especially when technology has the ability to convert assumptions into facts, and it takes on a truth-making, rather than a mere truth-revealing mission. This Article argues that it is problematic to enable technology to stand in for reflective thinking, and calls attention to the fact that evidentiary rules enable technology to decide what can be proven, ergo what truth is.

Considering "Machine Testimony": The Impact Of Facial Recognition Software On Eyewitness Identifications, Valena Beety

Duquesne Law Review

Andrea Roth's seminal work in Machine Testimony and Trial by Machine presented a problem that is now upon us: addressing biased algorithms and the rampant reliance on technology by prosecutors and law enforcement.¹ That reliance, however, is no longer unquestioning. Roth's work came at a crucial moment in time, when other articles were embracing the apparent impartiality of technology and algorithms for use in the criminal legal system. Her scholarship steered us away from that blind acceptance and dove deep, not only questioning technology itself, but also how to frame those questions of technology in the courtroom.

Biometrics And An Ai Bill Of Rights, Margaret Hu

Duquesne Law Review

This Article contends that an informed discussion on an Al Bill of Rights requires grappling with biometric data collection and its integration into emerging Al systems. Biometric Al systems serve a wide range of governmental purposes, including policing, border security and immigration enforcement, and biometric cyberintelligence and biometric-enabled warfare. These systems are increasingly categorized as "high-risk" when deployed in ways that may impact fundamental constitutional rights and human rights. There is growing recognition that high-risk biometric AI systems, such as facial recognition identification, can pose unprecedented challenges to criminal procedure rights. This Article concludes that a failure to recognize these …

Ending Manner-Of-Death Testimony And Other Opinion Determinations Of Crime, Keith A. Findley, Dean A. Strang

Duquesne Law Review

In January 2011, Ellen Greenberg's fianc6 and her apartment building manager broke down her apartment door after she failed repeatedly to respond to attempts to contact her.¹ They found herd ead in a pool of blood on the kitchen floor, the victim of twenty stab wounds to her chest, torso, head, and neck, including stab wounds to the back of her head and to her body through her clothes. They found a half-eaten fruit salad on the kitchen counter along with an overturned knife block. By all appearances, Greenberg was the victim of a grisly murder, and the medical …

On-Screen V. In Person: How A Tech-Savvy World Is Impacting Jurors' Perceptions Of Witnesses, Michael T. Deer

Duquesne Law Review

When speaking to a friend or loved one via video chat, one receives the thrill of seeing that person in real time-without a faceto- face encounter. Video chatting is a popular mechanism in the twenty-first century, as the technology comes in various forms and lives at our fingertips.¹ Whether a family is video chatting with an overseas servicemember during a holiday, a person is attending an online class or work meeting, or someone is seeing his or her doctor by way of a virtual appointment, our notion of "face time" has evolved significantly.² In fact, Merriam-Webster now defines …

Are The Federal Rules Of Evidence Unconstitutional?, Ethan J. Leib

American University Law Review

The Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) rest on an unacceptably shaky constitutional foundation. Unlike other regimes of federal rulemaking—for Civil Procedure, for Criminal Procedure, and for Appellate Procedure—the FRE rulemaking process contemplated by the Rules Enabling Act is both formally and functionally defective because Congress enacted the FRE as a statute first but purports to permit the Supreme Court to revise, repeal, and amend those laws over time, operating as a kind of supercharged administrative agency with the authority to countermand congressional statutes. Formally, this system violates the constitutionally-delineated separation of powers as announced in Chadha, Clinton, and the non-delegation …

Liberty And Justice For All?: A Pathfinder On The Use Of Lyrics As Evidence In Civil And Criminal Trial, Stephanie Washington

Upper Level Writing Requirement Research Papers

No abstract provided.