Evidence Commons^™

Long Live The Federal Rules Of Evidence!, Daniel J. Capra, Liesa L. Richter

Faculty Articles

The Federal Rules of Evidence have been pronounced dead. Indeed, the Federal Rules of Evidence have recently been declared dormant, stagnant, frozen, lethargic, and yes, deceased. In The Living Rules of Evidence, 170 U. Pa. L. Rev. 937 (March 2022), Professor Alexander Nunn claims that the Rules are lifeless, incapable of any meaningful change, and littered with anachronistic and even dangerous standards and provisions. To blame for the moribund state of the Federal Rules of Evidence is the bureaucratic and complex federal rulemaking process that requires amendments to traverse multiple constituencies in a multi-year process before taking effect. As a …

State V. Decosta, 293 A.3d 297 (R.I. 2023)., Maddi Leite

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Non-Judicial Recusals In Rhode Island: Empirical Evidence And Suggestions For Reform, Ross E. Cheit, Rose Lang-Maso

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

State V. Reverdes, 295 A.3d 770 (R.I. 2023)., Lia M. Williams

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Forfeiture By Wrongdoing In Domestic Homicide Cases: Where Are We Now?, Caren Myers Morrison

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

One of the few common law exceptions to the rule that every criminal defendant enjoys the right to “be confronted with the witnesses against him” is if the defendant has deliberately caused a witness’s unavailability. That a defendant could forfeit his confrontation rights through his own wrongdoing developed from the equitable concept that “no man shall profit from his wrong.” When the Supreme Court narrowed the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing in Giles v. California, it seemed like it had dealt a serious blow to the prosecution of domestic homicide cases. Rather than being able to introduce …

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

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

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 …

Constructing Confrontation: Between Constitutional And Evidence Theory, Michael S. Pardo

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Crawford v. Washington was significant as a matter of both constitutional and evidence law. From a constitutional perspective, the opinion was significant because of its “original public meaning” approach to interpreting the text of the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause. From an evidentiary perspective, the opinion was significant in recognizing a doctrinal rule that potentially excludes evidence in criminal trials that would otherwise be admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence as well as State evidence laws. This Essay explores Crawford and the subsequent Confrontation Clause cases from these distinct perspectives—illuminated by constitutional and …

Failing To Close Pandora's Box: Why Motions To Suppress Are Inadequate As A Remedy For False Confessions, Christina G. Leung

University of San Francisco Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Categorical Imperative: In Search Of The Mythical Perfect Privilege Log So Devoutly To Be Wished, Jared S. Sunshine

Touro Law Review

Though evidentiary privilege is amongst the most perplexing fields of the law, privilege logs are assuredly amongst the most vexing. With vastly increased discovery in the age of electronically stored information, the burdens incurred by individually articulating claims of privilege on every document have grown gargantuan. In desperate search of efficiencies, many commentators and courts have looked to “categorical” privilege logs that assert claims over generic groups of similar material rather than over each item seriatim. Disputes, however, have remained distressingly acrimonious, as these new categorical logs have proven no cure-all for the fundamental divergence of interests between litigants in …

Reimagining Youngblood's Bad Faith Requirement: Safeguarding Criminal Defendants' Due Process Rights Through A Burden-Shifting Framework, Rita Elfarissi

Michigan Law Review

Criminal defendants face an uphill battle when attempting to prove that the government’s loss or destruction of evidence that could have played a significant role in their defense deprived them of their constitutional due process rights. To make this showing, the defendant must prove that the government lost or destroyed the evidence in bad faith. This requirement is problematic because direct evidence illustrating the subjective intent of the government officials who lost or destroyed the evidence is unlikely to exist, and in the off chance it does, the prosecution is unlikely to freely hand it over to the defendant. Thus, …

The Consumer’S Choice To Boycott, Agnes Bresee

Seattle University Law Review

In the wake of employees losing their jobs upon voicing their political opinions concerning Israel, Harvard and Columbia law students’ job offers being rescinded upon expressing support for Palestine, and the names and social media profiles of individuals who support Palestine being collected and listed on Canary Mission, such backlash may leave many Americans wondering what form of resistance to settler-colonialist apartheid is acceptable in the twenty-first century. Recently, the movement to collectively boycott brands like Starbucks, which sued its Worker’s Union for a tweet expressing support for Palestine; Disney, which donated money to Israel; and McDonald’s, where a location …

A Different Approach To Agency Theory And Implications For Esg, Jonathan Bonham, Amoray Riggs-Cragun

Seattle University Law Review

In conventional agency theory, the agent is modeled as exerting unobservable “effort” that influences the distribution over outcomes the principal cares about. Recent papers instead allow the agent to choose the entire distribution, an assumption that better describes the extensive and flexible control that CEOs have over firm outcomes. Under this assumption, the optimal contract rewards the agent directly for outcomes the principal cares about, rather than for what those outcomes reveal about the agent’s effort. This article briefly summarizes this new agency model and discusses its implications for contracting on ESG activities.

Overseeing The Administrative State, Jill E. Fisch

Seattle University Law Review

In a series of recent cases, the Supreme Court has reduced the regulatory power of the Administrative State. Pending cases offer vehicles for the Court to go still further. Although the Court’s skepticism of administrative agencies may be rooted in Constitutional principles or political expediency, this Article explores another possible explanation—a shift in the nature of agencies and their regulatory role. As Pritchard and Thompson detail in their important book, A History of Securities Law in the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court was initially skeptical of agency power, jeopardizing Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR)’s ambitious New Deal plan. The Court’s acceptance …

The Sec, The Supreme Court, And The Administrative State, Paul G. Mahoney

Seattle University Law Review

Pritchard and Thompson have given those of us who study the SEC and the securities laws much food for thought. Their methodological focus is on the internal dynamics of the Court’s deliberations, on which they have done detailed and valuable work. The Court did not, however, operate in a vacuum. Intellectual trends in economics and law over the past century can also help us understand the SEC’s fortunes in the federal courts and make predictions about its future.

A Hard Pill To Swallow: The Abysmal Mental Health Standards Of Detained Immigrant Children In The United States, Rama Bankesly

Seattle University Law Review

After setting foot into the U.S., unaccompanied children must learn to navigate academic and legal systems while receiving little support and carrying the heavy burden of effects of trauma on their mental health. They need access to mental health care from qualified professionals, but as this Comment will explain, they systematically fail to receive care, as can be seen in cases like Doe v. Shenandoah Valley Juv. Ctr. Comm’n. In Shenandoah, an unaccompanied child arrived in the U.S. and was placed in a facility that failed to provide remotely adequate mental health care and in fact was subjected …

Similar Fact Evidence In Contractual Interpretation: Bhoomatidevi D/O Kishinchand Chugani Mrs Kavita Gope Mirwani V Nantakumar S/O V Ramachandra And Another [2023] Sghc 37, Calvin John Kaiwen Chirnside

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

In the recent Singapore High Court case of Bhoomatidevi d/o Kishinchand Chugani Mrs Kavita Gope Mirwani v Nantakumar s/o v Ramachandra and another [2023] SGHC 37, the claimant argued, inter alia, that evidence of a prior contract between the first defendant and a third party should be admitted to prove that the defendant had entered into a loan agreement with her in his personal capacity. Justice Lee Seiu Kin dismissed her claim, applying s. 14 of the Evidence Act.

Survey Of Capital Cases In Georgia, Jessica Heywood

Scholarly Works

This Article examines five cases decided during the Survey period: two decisions by the Supreme Court of Georgia and three decisions by federal courts involving Georgia defendants. The Georgia Supreme Court cases are a direct appeal and a habeas appeal. All three federal cases are habeas petitions by Georgia state prisoners. We included federal cases because they involve significant points of law and illustrate the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit’s continued lax oversight of habeas claims, decades after the passage of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) by Congress. The small number of cases …

Introduction To The Symposium On Digital Evidence, Melissa (M.J.) Durkee, Tamar Megiddo

Scholarship@WashULaw

The past few decades have seen radical advances in the availability and use of digital evidence in multiple areas of international law. Witnesses snap cellphone photos of unfolding atrocities and post them online, while others share updates in real time through messaging apps. Immigration officers search cell phones. Private citizens launch open-source online investigations. Investigators scrape social media posts. Digital experts verify authenticity with satellite geolocation. These new types of evidence and digitally facilitated methods and patterns of evidence gathering and analysis are revolutionizing the everyday practice of international law, drawing in an ever-wider circle of actors who can contribute …

Artificial Intelligence In The Courtroom: Forensic Machines, Expert Witnesses, And The Confrontation Clause, Ian Maddox

Journal of Law, Technology, & the Internet

From traditional methods like ballistics and fingerprinting, to the probabilistic genotyping models of the twenty-first century, the forensic laboratory has evolved into a cutting-edge area of scientific exploration. This rapid growth in forensic technologies will not stop here. Considering recent developments in artificial intelligence (“AI”), future forensic tools will likely become increasingly sophisticated. To be sure, AI-enabled forensic tools are far from theoretical; AI applications in the forensic sciences have already emerged in practice. Machine learning-enabled acoustic gunshot detectors, facial recognition software, and a variety of pattern recognition learning models are already disrupting law enforcement operations across the country. Soon, …

Correcting Federal Rule Of Evidence 404 To Clarify The Inadmissibility Of Character Evidence, Hillel J. Bavli

Fordham Law Review

Courts misinterpret Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b)(2) as an exception to Rule 404(b)(1)’s prohibition on character evidence rather than a mere clarification that emphasizes the permissibility of other-acts evidence whose relevance does not rely on propensity reasoning. This misinterpretation turns the rule against character evidence on its head by effectively replacing Rule 404 with a Rule 403 balancing—and one that incorrectly treats character inferences as probative rather than prejudicial, thereby favoring admissibility rather than exclusion. Consequently, as currently interpreted, Rule 404(b)(2) generates substantial unpredictability and verdicts based on conduct not at issue in a case.

I therefore propose that the …