Evidence Commons^™

Measures Of Justice: Researching And Evaluating Lay Legal Assistance Programs, Tanina Rostain, James Teufel

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In recent years a national movement to train lay advocates and advisors to assist people with their common justice problems has emerged in the United States. A host of new programs have launched that allow trained navigators and justice workers to provide legal assistance. These programs – developed in Alaska, Delaware, South Carolina, Arizona, and Utah, among other places – vary in their substantive focus, the skills they impart, and their approaches to reaching the people and communities they seek to help. The proliferation of lay legal assistance programs creates research imperatives and opportunities. These programs need to be assessed …

The Incoherence Of Evidence Law, G. Alexander Nunn

Notre Dame Law Review

What is the purpose of evidence law? The answer might seem intuitive. Evidence law exists, of course, to foster verdict accuracy, legitimacy, and efficiency. But these kindred aims often come into conflict. Policy tradeoffs are inescapable in evidence law, meaning that an evidentiary regime must clarify how its normative objectives cohere. Do accuracy, legitimacy, and efficiency work together on equal footing, such that the goal of a code is to maximize each objective to the extent possible? Or does one of evidence law’s aims take precedence over the rest? And if one goal takes priority, what is the role of …

University Of The District Of Columbia Law Review, University Of The District Of Columbia Law Review

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Incoherence Of Evidence Law, G. Alexander Nunn

Faculty Scholarship

What is the purpose of evidence law? The answer might seem intuitive. Evidence law exists, of course, to foster verdict accuracy, legitimacy, and efficiency. But these kindred aims often come into conflict. Policy tradeoffs are inescapable in evidence law, meaning that an evidentiary regime must clarify how its normative objectives cohere. Do accuracy, legitimacy, and efficiency work together on equal footing, such that the goal of a code is to maximize each objective to the extent possible? Or does one of evidence law’s aims take precedence over the rest? And if one goal takes priority, what is the role of …

Amicus Brief Of Legal Scholars Lee Kovarsky Et Al. In Support Of Petitioner, Ira P. Robbins

Amicus Briefs & Court Filings

QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether a second-in-time habeas claim filed while an appeal from the judgment on an initial habeas claim is still pending counts as a second or successive habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)

INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE: Amici curiae are law professors and legal scholars who study federal post-conviction law and civil procedure. Amici curiae have no personal interest in the outcome of this case. They all share an interest in seeing habeas law applied in a way that ensures the just and timely adjudication of claims while preserving the traditional and intended operation of the Federal Rules …

Rising Internet Shutdowns In India: A Legal Analysis, Shrutanjaya Bhardwaj, Nakul Nayak, Raja Venkata Krishna Dandamudi, Sarvjeet Singh, Veda Handa

Indian Journal of Law and Technology

The central theme of this paper is to critically study the interplay of internet shutdowns with the right to freedom of speech and expression. A study of this nature is necessitated by India’s abysmal record with inter- net shutdowns. We must hence begin examining Internet shutdowns seriously within the Indian constitutional framework. In the recent judgment of Anuradha Bhasin, the Supreme Court has accepted that Article 19(1)(a) protects the right to disseminate and receive information through the internet. Therefore, the constitutional validity of every internet shutdown would have to be tested (at least) against the three standards ordinarily applied …

Sharing Of Children’S Health Data By Health Professionals And Parents – A Consideration Of Legal Duties, Dr. Carolyn Johnston

Indian Journal of Law and Technology

Children’s health data such as blood pressure, X-rays and written notes of medical examinations are produced in a clinical setting through health professionals’ interaction with their minor patients. Health care practitioners owe legal and professional obligations not to disclose such information without consent or other legally recognised authorisation. With the increasing advent of data generated by patients themselves from wearable devices such as continuous glucose monitors and health apps, the patient, or parents, have initial control of the data and decide who to share it with. Where wearable devices have been provided to parents by the child’s health care provider …

Conceptualizing An International Framework For Active Private Cyber Defence, Arindrajit Basu, Elonnai Hickok

Indian Journal of Law and Technology

Private sector cyber defence mechanisms are emerging despite existing legislation outlawing use of active defence by individuals and non-state entities. Thus, a key window exists for policy-makers in the possibility of establishing a framework for existing APCD practices that would enable optimal utilisation of private sector capabilities for securing cyber-space at an organizational and national level. This must happen in consonance with circumscribing their operations within the boundaries of the rule of law, both in terms of domestic legislation and international law. This paper seeks to unpack the complexities that underscore each of these challenges and identify avenues towards resolving …

Facing Up To The Risks Of Automated Facial-Recognition Technologies In Indian Law Enforcement, Ameen Jauhar

Indian Journal of Law and Technology

Within the larger discourse of risk mitigation of emerging technologies, the ever-expanding deployment of automated facial recognition technology (‘AFRT’) has garnered much skepticism. In India too, there has been a reported rise of states and law enforcement officials enthusiastically resorting to the use of AFRT.

The author will first delve into some of the controversial risks associated with AFRT, analysing them through the lens of Article 21 and the principle of due process under the Indian Constitution. The paper will then identify some of the regulatory solutions that are currently part of the discourse on minimising risks of AFRT and …

Sotomayor Cites Maurer Faculty Member In Scotus’ Decline To Hear Alabama Bite Mark Case, James Owsley Boyd

Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)

The case of an Alabama man convicted of murdering his wife in 1985 will not be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court, despite evidence that, nearly 40 years later, has been “wholly discredited.”

The Supreme Court denied certiorari in the case of McCrory v. Alabama, but Justice Sonia Sotomayor cited research from Indiana University Maurer School of Law Professor Valena Beety in her concurring agreement with the court’s decision.

Charles M. McCrory was convicted for the murder of his wife, Julie Bonds, based in large part on expert testimony from an odontologist who matched McCrory’s teeth to two bite marks …

The Needless Search For A Founding-Era "Hearsay" Definition, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

Modern Confrontation Clause doctrine permits only unconfronted “out-of-court statements that would have been admissible in a criminal case at the time of the founding.” To operationalize this concept, the Supreme Court identifies “testimonial hearsay” as the Clause’s primary concern. Its opinions regularly dive into the historical record to refine what counts as “testimonial” but ignore that record in defining “hearsay.” This omission cannot last. Cases in the lower courts, and one on the Court’s recent docket, concern testimonial but (arguably) non-hearsay statements. And while confrontation jurisprudence is supposed to be tied to founding-era evidence law, the “hearsay” definition, casually referenced …

Confrontation, The Legacy Of Crawford, And Important Unanswered Questions, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The right to confront has a long history. In the United States, the Confrontation Clause provides: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right… to be confronted with the witnesses against him[.]” One of the most troublesome areas of Confrontation Clause jurisprudence has been the Clause’s application to “hearsay statements offered against a criminal defendant pursuant to a hearsay exception or exemption[.]” The Supreme Court’s confrontation analysis in this situation once hinged on the statement’s reliability, with the traditional hearsay rule and its exceptions and exemptions as a guide. But in Crawford v. Washington, the Court considered …

Guess Who?: First-Time In-Court Identifications And Due Process, Natalie Beers

Washington and Lee Law Review

Juries believe eyewitnesses. When an identifying eyewitness takes the stand and points to a defendant in a courtroom, the jury is more likely to render a guilty verdict. But how reliable is that identification? What if the eyewitness is on the stand identifying a perpetrator for the first time, in the court room, rather than at the police station with a lineup or photo array? How do those suggestive circumstances implicate a criminal defendant’s due process rights?

First-time in-court identifications are inherently suggestive. While the Supreme Court has acknowledged the suggestive nature of similar identifications, it did not directly address …

The Brain Is In Your Court: Evaluating Intellectual Property Infringement Audience Through The Lens Of Neuroscience, Madyson Kent

Washington and Lee Law Review

To protect creations of the mind, the law needs to understand the mind. Thankfully, the rapidly emerging field of neuroscience provides an invaluable glimpse into the inner workings of the human brain. Now that scientific instruments provide a window into the living brain, it is time to reexamine the way intellectual property law decides the outcomes of infringement lawsuits.

Critically examining neuroscience in the context of the law helps to answer the most fundamental question in an intellectual property lawsuit: Was there infringement? A judicial hesitancy to understand the thought processes of artists and creators results in relying on the …

The Needless Search For A Founding-Era "Hearsay" Definition, Jeffrey Bellin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Modern Confrontation Clause doctrine permits only unconfronted "out-of-court statements that would have been admissible in a criminal case at the time of the founding." To operationalize this concept, the Supreme Court identifies "testimonial hearsay" as the Clause's primary concern. Its opinions regularly dive into the historical record to refine what counts as "testimonial" but ignore that record in defining "hearsay." This omission cannot last. Cases in the lower courts, and one on the Court's recent docket, concern testimonial but (arguably) non-hearsay statements. And while confrontation jurisprudence is supposed to be tied to founding-era evidence law, the "hearsay" definition, casually referenced …

Murder On The Hearsay Trail, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

Judges, lawyers, and law students struggle to apply American evidence law’s most distinctive feature—the hearsay prohibition. The problem is that hearsay is difficult to master and somewhat dull. At the same time, hearsay evidence is ubiquitous and important. Every litigator has a story about a judge’s eccentric hearsay rulings; mine is the trial judge who waved his hand dismissively at hearsay objections, letting witnesses answer on the grounds that “I want to hear it.” And the case law is littered with appellate opinions scolding trial judges for erroneous hearsay rulings while introducing errors of their own.

That is just the …

Washington Civil Jury Trials Via Zoom: Perspectives From The Bench, Marisa Pasnick

Washington Law Review

Many professions have felt the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, including the legal field. At the onset of COVID-19, many courthouses closed and trials halted, but as the pandemic continued, the need to resume judicial proceedings led courts to turn to virtual platforms to conduct civil jury trials. This Comment examines the response of judges in Washington State to the use of Zoom for conducting civil jury trials. Interviews with judges across Washington reveal a stark contrast in opinions among judges in different districts as well as within districts. This Comment answers the question of how judges feel about …

Getting Around The Marking Requirement: Closing The Loophole On Damages, Ethan Buresh

UMKC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Needless Search For A Founding-Era "Hearsay" Definition, Jeffrey Bellin

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Modern Confrontation Clause doctrine permits only unconfronted “out-of-court statements that would have been admissible in a criminal case at the time of the founding.” To operationalize this concept, the Supreme Court identifies “testimonial hearsay” as the Clause’s primary concern. Its opinions regularly dive into the historical record to refine what counts as “testimonial” but ignore that record in defining “hearsay.” This omission cannot last. Cases in the lower courts, and one on the Court’s recent docket, concern testimonial but (arguably) non-hearsay statements. And while confrontation jurisprudence is supposed to be tied to founding-era evidence law, the “hearsay” definition, casually referenced …

Authenticating Social Media Evidence In Chinese Criminal Procedure Law -- A Comparative Study, Yage Huang

Maurer Theses and Dissertations

Authentication requires the proponent to provide sufficient proof that the proposed social media evidence is, indeed, what it is claimed to be. The rapid proliferation of social media evidence has posed significant challenges for its authentication. This dissertation explores the authentication challenges for social media evidence in a comprehensive manner.

This research employs a qualitative research methodology, including theoretical and analytical methods, to examine the theoretical approaches, statutory provisions, and recent judicial rulings related to the authentication of social media evidence within the legal frameworks of China and the United States. Through a comparative analysis, this study reveals significant commonalities …