Evidence Commons^™

Real Rape, Too, Bennett Capers

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Home Is Where The Crime Is, Bennett Capers

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

"Sweet Childish Days": Using Developmental Psychology Research In Evaluating The Admissibility Of Out-Of-Court Statements By Young Children, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

A three-year-old child, while being bathed by her babysitter, innocently mentions that her “pee-pee” hurts. When the babysitter asks the child how she hurt it, she says, “Uncle Ernie (her mother’s boyfriend) told me not to tell.” A subsequent medical examination reveals that the child has gonorrhea, a sexually transmitted disease.

By the time of trial, the child is four and-a-half-years old. When questioned by the trial judge, she cannot explain to the judge’s satisfaction, “the difference between the truth and a lie.” Moreover, she has no long term memory of the incident. The judge rules the child incompetent to …

No Good Whistle Goes Unpunished: Can We Protect European Antitrust Leniency Applications From Discovery?, Constanza Nicolosi

Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business

In recent years, the most successful tool in the antitrust arsenal of the European Commission and the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice has proven to be leniency programs, which provide full immunity from fines to the first cartel-member that confesses its participation in the conspiracy. Even though European and U.S. leniency programs are fairly similar to one another, procedural differences may undermine their effectiveness. It has long been argued that potential discovery of corporate statements accompanying the leniency application before the Commission in subsequent proceedings in the United States would put the firms that cooperated with the …

Evidence, Nancy Amoury Combs

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Schultz V. Bank Of America: A Fly In The Financial Buttermilk - Clarifying The Common Knowledge Exception To Improve Litigation Efficiency And Bank Safety, Lauren M. Elfner

Maryland Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

When Machines Are Watching: How Warrantless Use Of Gps Surveillance Technology Violates The Fourth Amendment Right Against Unreasonable Searches, David Thaw, Priscilla Smith, Nabiha Syed, Albert Wong

Articles

Federal and state law enforcement officials throughout the nation are currently using Global Positioning System (GPS) technology for automated, prolonged surveillance without obtaining warrants. As a result, cases are proliferating in which criminal defendants are challenging law enforcement’s warrantless uses of GPS surveillance technology, and courts are looking for direction from the Supreme Court. Most recently, a split has emerged between the Ninth and D.C. Circuit Courts of Appeal on the issue. In United States v. Pineda-Moreno, the Ninth Circuit relied on United States v. Knotts — which approved the limited use of beeper technology without a warrant — to …

Ethical Guidance For A Grander Jury, Anna Offit

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

No abstract provided.

A Novel Countermeasure Against The Reaction Time Index Of Countermeasure Use In The P300-Based Complex Trial Protocol For Detection Of Concealed Information, Alexander Sokolovsky, Jessica Rothenberg, Elena Labkovsky, John B. Meixner Jr., J. Peter Rosenfeld

Scholarly Works

A P300 deception detection protocol was tested using simultaneous versus serial countermeasures and stimulus acknowledgment responses. Previously, P300 showed recognition and elevated reaction time identified countermeasure use. Probe-irrelevant P300 differences were significant in both countermeasure groups and control group. Detection rates were 11/12 for controls, 10/12 for serial countermeasure users, and 11/13 for simultaneous countermeasure users. Reaction time detected countermeasure use in serial responders, but not simultaneous responders. The simultaneous response reaction times were indistinguishable from controls.

Williams V. Illinois And The Confrontation Clause: Does Testimony By A Surrogate Witness Violate The Confrontation Clause?, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article comprises a four-part debate between Paul Rothstein, Professor of Law at Georgetown Law Center, and Ronald J. Coleman, who works in the litigation practice group at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, on Williams v. Illinois, a Supreme Court case that involves the Confrontation Clause, which entitles a criminal defendant to confront an accusing witness in court. The issue at hand is whether said clause is infringed when a report not introduced into evidence at trial is used by an expert to testify about the results of testing that has been conducted by a non-testifying third party. …

Voluntary Client Testimony As A Privilege Waiver: Is Ohio's Law Caught In A Time Warp, David B. Alden, Matthew P. Silverstein

Cleveland State Law Review

The question of whether Ohio should retain the waiver through voluntary testimony rule-assuming that is the current rule-is neither close nor difficult. The relevant statute dates back to the middle of the nineteenth century when Ohio enacted its first code of civil procedure, and if it in fact leads to a waiver, has been substantively unchanged in the intervening one hundred fifty plus years. The rule undermines the policies the attorney-client privilege was designed to further, and the policy on which the rule apparently was based-preventing perjured testimony-no longer has the primacy it did in the mid-nineteenth century and, in …

Antitrust Review Of The At&T/T-Mobile Transaction, Maurice E. Stucke, Allen Grunes

College of Law Faculty Scholarship

In this Essay, we review AT&T Inc.’s proposed $39 billion acquisition of T-Mobile USA, Inc., under federal merger law, under the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission’s 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines, and with a focus on possible remedies. We find, under a rule of law approach, that the proposed acquisition is presumptively anticompetitive, and the merging parties in their public disclosures have failed to overcome this presumption. Next we find that under the Merger Guidelines, there is reason to believe that the transaction may result in higher prices to consumers under several different plausible theories. Finally, we turn …

Plea Bargaining, Discovery, And The Intractable Problem Of Impeachment Disclosures, R. Michael Cassidy

R. Michael Cassidy

In a criminal justice system where guilty pleas are the norm and trials the rare exception, the issue of how much discovery a defendant is entitled to before allocution has immense significance. This article examines the scope of a prosecutor’s obligation to disclose impeachment information before a guilty plea. This question has polarized the criminal bar and bedeviled the academic community since the Supreme Court’s controversial decision in United States v. Ruiz (2002). A critical feature of the debate has been the enduring schism between a prosecutor’s legal and ethical obligations – a gulf that the American Bar Association recently …

"Waiving" Goodbye To Rights: Plea Bargaining And The Defense Dilemma Of Competent Representation, Jane Moriarty

Jane Campbell Moriarty

The proposed amendments to the ABA Criminal Justice Standards for Prosecutors and Defense Lawyers (“Proposed Standards”) address a number of problematic issues related to the roles of both prosecutors and defense attorneys. This Symposium Article considers waiver of rights in the context of the Standards, focusing on guilty pleas and the so-called “preconditions” that prosecutors generally require before even entertaining the defendant’s proffer, colloquially termed “Queen for a Day” agreements It reviews the development in the law since 1993, the changes in the practice since that time, and the proposed changes to the Standards. The article focuses on the complex …

Requirements Of A Valid Islamic Marriage Vis-À-Vis Requirements Of A Valid Customary Marriage In Nigeria, Olanike Sekinat Odewale Mrs

Olanike Sekinat Adelakun

Simplifying Discovery And Production- Using Easy Frameworks To Evaluate The 2009 Term Of Cases.Pdf, Eric Carpenter

Eric R. Carpenter

23. Assessing Children’S Competency To Take The Oath In Court: The Influence Of Question Type On Children’S Accuracy., Angela D. Evans, Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

Litigating Together: Social, Moral, And Legal Obligations, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

In a post-Class Action Fairness Act world, the modern mass-tort class action is disappearing. Indeed, multi-district litigation and private aggregation through contracts with plaintiffs’ law firms are the new mass-tort frontier. But something’s amiss with this “nonclass aggregation.” These new procedures involve a fundamentally different dynamic than class actions: plaintiffs have names, faces, and something deeply personal at stake. Their claims are independently economically viable, which gives them autonomy expectations about being able to control the course of their litigation. Yet, they participate in a familiar, collective effort to establish the defendant’s liability. They litigate from both a personal and …

Rethinking The Indefinite Detention Of Sex Offenders, Fredrick E. Vars

Fredrick E Vars

Thousands of sex offenders in the United States are being held indefinitely under civil commitment programs. The analysis in this Article suggests that none (or precious few) belong there. Specifically, in a large dataset, an instrument as good as the one most widely used by experts (the “Static-99”) could not identify even one sex offender who met the legal standards for commitment. Supplementing such instruments with additional information appears not to improve matters, so the failure of the instrument is profoundly disturbing. There are three possible responses: (1) improve instruments to meet existing standards; (2) lower the standards; and (3) …

Vertical Restraints, Dealers With Power, And Antitrust Policy, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s Leegin decision has now brought the rule of reason to all purely vertical intrabrand distribution restraints. But the rule of reason does not mean per se legality and occasions for anticompetitive vertically imposed restraints may still arise. Of all those that have been suggested the most plausible are vertical restraints imposed at the behest of a powerful dealer or group (cartel) of dealers.

Although a vertical distribution restraint resembles a dealer cartel in that both limit intraband competition, a manufacturer restraining the distribution of its product shuns the excess dealer profits a dealer cartel would seek. Accordingly, …