Evidence Commons^™

One Size Does Not Fit All: Alternatives To The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Henry Zhuhao Wang

Scholarly Publications

The Federal Rules of Evidence have been so successful that many people easily equate them to the whole field of evidence law. But this is a false equivalence. Our world is complicated, diversified, and dynamic. So too is evidence law, which is like a rainforest in which the Federal Rules are simply the largest tree, not a forest unto themselves. In fact, the Federal Rules of Evidence are limited in their applicability due to three fundamental assumptions: the presence of a jury trial, an adversarial process, and witness oral testimony.

This article illustrates the dominance of the Federal Rules of …

The Perverse Carrot: How Extreme Economic Precarity Is Exploited Through Witness Perks, Roxann Matthews

University of San Francisco Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Little Knowledge Is A Dangerous Thing: Custody Evaluators And The Pop Psychology Of “Parental Alienation” In The California Family Law Courts, Carrie Leonetti

University of San Francisco Law Review

No abstract provided.

Nestlé V. Doe: A Death Knell To Corporate Human Rights Accountability?, Phillip Ayers

Seattle University Law Review

The Supreme Court in Nestlé v. Doe held that foreign plaintiffs who claimed to be victims of overseas tortious conduct by corporate defendants had no jurisdiction to sue in federal courts using the Alien Tort Statute. This Comment looks at the history of the Alien Tort Statute, from its inspiration, long dormancy, and recent reinvigoration beginning in the 1980s. The Comment then explores the background of Nestlé and its issues with child slavery in its cocoa supply chain. From there, the Comment analyzes the Nestlé v. Doe decision, and posits an alternative outcome. Finally, this Comment looks for a new …

Lost In Translation: The Best Evidence Rule And Foreign-Language Recordings In Federal Court, Liesa L. Richter

Faculty Articles

The federal court system and the Federal Rules of Evidence are designed around the English language. As the United States becomes increasingly diverse and multicultural, however, a growing number of Americans speak a primary language other than English. The federal courts and the Federal Rules of Evidence must accommodate parties, witnesses, and evidence presented in a foreign language, notwithstanding their English-only orientation. Federal Rule of Evidence 1002, known more colloquially as the Best Evidence Rule, assumes that evidence will come in only one, English flavor, however. The Best Evidence Rule is powerful and straightforward, ensuring that jurors have access to …

State V. Hudgen¸ 272 A.3d 1069 (R.I. 2022)., Judd W. Krasher

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

To Protect And Serve California's Children: Mitigating Police Coercion Of Minors Through California's New Attorney Consultation Mandate, Lila Garlinghouse

University of San Francisco Law Review

No abstract provided.

Safeguarding The Alford Plea: Minimizing State-Sanctioned Wrongful Convictions, Zana Molina

Mitchell Hamline Law Journal of Public Policy and Practice

No abstract provided.

Corporate Governance And Gender Equality: A Study Of Comply-Or-Explain Disclosure Regulation, Aaron A. Dhir, Sarah Kaplan, Maria Arabella Robles

Seattle University Law Review

In 2020, the Nasdaq Stock Market filed a proposal with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission seeking permission to adopt a board diversity-related disclosure requirement for its listed companies. In 2021, the SEC approved the proposal, thus entrenching Nasdaq’s position as the most significant stock exchange to date to mandate listing rules that reflect the intention of diversifying corporate boardrooms. Nasdaq’s movement into the diversity space is not the first attempt to address homogeneous boards in the U.S. In 2009, the SEC adopted a rule requiring publicly traded firms to report on whether they consider diversity in identifying director nominees. …

Judicial Ethics And The Eradication Of Racism, Dontay Proctor-Mills

Seattle University Law Review

In 2020, the Washington Supreme Court entrusted the legal community with working to eradicate racism from its legal system. Soon after, Washington’s Commission on Judicial Conduct (hereinafter the Commission) received a complaint about a bus ad for North Seattle College featuring King County Superior Court Judge David Keenan. Along with a photo of Judge Keenan’s face, the ad included the following language: “A Superior Court Judge, David Keenan got into law in part to advocate for marginalized communities. David’s changing the world. He started at North.” The Commission admonished Judge Keenan for violating the Code of Judicial Conduct, in part …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Why Corporate Boards Should Include Lgbtq+ People, Jeremy Mcclane, Darren Rosenblum

Seattle University Law Review

Corporate boardrooms sit at the heart of most of society’s most consequential decisions but fall far short of the diversity of our society. The current movement toward board diversification aims to remedy the underrepresentation of marginalized groups on corporate boards. More recently, some efforts have included LGBTQ+ people, even though the basis for their inclusion on corporate boards remains largely unstated. This Article examines both the normative and instrumental bases for LGBTQ+ inclusion in board diversity initiatives, articulating unspoken assumptions and linking LGBTQ+ people to the broader inclusion effort. In so doing, it begins to surface the unique issues LGBTQ+ …

Theorizing Corroboration, Maggie Wittlin

Faculty Scholarship

A child makes an out-of-court statement accusing an adult of abuse. That statement is important proof, but it also presents serious reliability concerns. When deciding whether it is sufficiently reliable to be admitted, should a court consider whether the child’s statement is corroborated—whether, for example, there is medical evidence of abuse? More broadly, should courts consider corroboration when deciding whether evidence is reliable enough to be admitted at trial? Judges, rule-makers, and scholars have taken significantly divergent approaches to this question and come to different conclusions.

This Article argues that there is a key problem with using corroboration to evaluate …

Blockchain, The Superhero That The Healthcare Industry Needs, Victor Wang

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The note argues that blockchain technology holds significant potential for transforming the healthcare industry by enhancing data security and efficiency. However, its integration faces legal challenges due to conflicts with existing healthcare laws, particularly the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and the HITECH Act. The note contends that blockchain's decentralized and immutable nature violates key HIPAA requirements, such as data disposal and accountability standards. It advocates for updating these laws to accommodate blockchain technology and ensure compliance, emphasizing the need for legal frameworks to evolve alongside technological advancements.

Strengthening Nagpra, B. Stephen Jones

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The note examines the limitations of the Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) in addressing international repatriation of cultural patrimony and proposes complementary legal frameworks to fill these gaps. It highlights the potential of the Safeguard Tribal Objects of Patrimony Act (STOP Act) and the Indigenous McClain Doctrine to enhance protections, while advocating for the recognition of intangible cultural patrimony and the use of moral rights and the right to publicity to safeguard Indigenous cultural sovereignty.

And A Second Opinion For All... And Anything Else? The Jack Eichel Saga And Issues Of Medical Autonomy, Seth Warshaw

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The note examines the legal and bioethical implications of the Jack Eichel Saga, focusing on the dispute between Eichel and the Buffalo Sabres regarding medical treatment under the NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). It argues that the current CBA's "due consideration" standard for team physicians fails to adequately protect players' medical autonomy and informed consent rights. The analysis concludes that the Sabres would likely prevail in arbitration due to the narrow interpretation of the CBA's provisions, but the dispute highlights the need for reforms to align the CBA with ethical medical standards and enhance player autonomy.

How Florida’S Courts Should Evaluate The Admissibility Of Field Sobriety Testing And Blood Thc Levels Evidence In Marijuana Impaired Driving Prosecutions, Christopher Bomhoff

FIU Law Review

Field sobriety and blood alcohol concentration tests are proven reliable techniques to determine whether a person us under the influence of alcohol. No such technique has been developed to reliably determine whether a person is under the influence of marijuana. However, despite a lack of scientific consensus regarding the reliability of field sobriety and blood toxicology tests to determine marijuana impairment, these methods are routinely used as evidence of guilt in marijuana impaired driving prosecutions. Twenty-four states have legalized the recreational use of marijuana, and Florida appears to be set to join them in the near future. As a result …

When To Be Objectionable… And How Not To Be An Artless Clay-Brained Pignut, Leonard Niehoff

Articles

Having taught evidence for more than 30 years. I've become fairly good at predicting the questions students will ask, especially the questions that are hardest to answer. One of those typically comes after we've discussed how to object to evidence. We've worked through the basics: Stand up, speak up, say that you object, and briefly explain why. At this point a student almost always raises his or her and says something like this: "OK. I understand the how part. But when do I object?"

Digital Habit Evidence, Andrew Guthrie Ferguson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This Article explores how “habit evidence” will become a catalyst for a new form of digital proof based on the explosive growth of smart homes, smart cars, smart devices, and the Internet of Things. Habit evidence is the rule that certain sorts of semiautomatic, regularized responses to particular stimuli are trustworthy and thus admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence (“FRE”) 406 “Habit; Routine Practice” and state equivalents.

While well established since the common law, “habit” has made only an inconsistent appearance in reported cases and has been underutilized in trial practice. But intriguingly, once applied to the world of …

Rapt Admissions: Comparing Proposed Federal Rule Of Evidence 416 “Rap Shield” With The Rule 412 “Rape Shield”, Patience Tyne

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Creative expression depicting illicit activity can cause jurors to infer improper conclusions about a defendant, even when the jurors attempt to analyze such evidence objectively. When the government seeks to admit a defendant’s creative work into evidence in a criminal trial, courts use existing evidentiary rules to balance the work’s probative value against its risk of unfair prejudice. These rules are supposed to prevent unfair prejudice, but various scholars have shown that courts do not always appreciate how unfairly prejudicial art can be. Rap music presents unique challenges because jurors may fail to discern the work’s literal versus symbolic meaning. …