Evidence Commons^™

Artificial Justice: The Quandary Of Ai In The Courtroom, Paul W. Grimm, Maura R. Grossman, Sabine Gless, Mireille Hildebrandt

Judicature International

No abstract provided.

Optimal Standards Of Proof In Antitrust, Murat C. Mungan, Joshua Wright

Faculty Scholarship

Economic analyses of antitrust institutions have thus far focused predominantly on optimal penalties and the design of substantive legal rules, and have largely ignored the standard of proof used in trials as a policy tool in shaping behavior. This neglected tool can play a unique role in the antitrust context, where a given firm may have the choice to engage in exceptional anticompetitive or procompetitive behavior, or simply follow more conventional business practices. The standard of proof used in determining the legality of a firm’s conduct affects not only whether the firm chooses to engage in pro- versus anticompetitive behavior, …

An Analytical Study On Legal Validity Of Online Dispute Resolution (Odr) System In India And Indonesia, Dr Rahul Nikam, Bangkim Singh Nongthombam

Indonesia Law Review

Advancement in technology brought many inevitable changes with more efficiency, making human life easier. Benefit of technology shall be incorporated for effective and efficient justice delivery in dispute resolution mechanism. New development in this area is online arbitration dispute resolutions (ODR) which have been without doubt adopted and practices by justice delivery system across the globe. But the question remains the same as whether justice delivery system is equipped to cope up in the same pace with the changes taking place in the society and technology. Are the existing laws being enough to conduct online system as an effective mechanism …

For Whom The Sol Tolls: Examining The Role Of The Discovery Rule And Statutes Of Limitations In Ncaa Concussion Litigation, Joseph Sabin Esq., Andrew L. Goldsmith Ph.D.

UNH Sports Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lgbtq Youth And The Promise Of The Kennedy Quartet, Michael J. Higdon

Cardozo Law Review

The Supreme Court has only issued four opinions endorsing the constitutional rights of sexual minorities, each of them authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy. These four cases, which this Article refers to collectively as “the Kennedy Quartet,” have done much to advance the equality of LGBTQ adults in the United States. The question remains, however, as to what extent those cases likewise protect LGBTQ children. Far from simply being an academic question, this issue has taken on increased urgency as legislators in a number of states—thwarted by the Kennedy Quartet in their ability to target LGBTQ adults—have turned their attentions to …

Brown (Larry) V. State Of Nevada, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 44 (June 23, 2022), Anne-Greyson Long

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In this appeal, the Court considered whether a jury may consider footwear impression evidence without the aid of expert testimony. The Court determined it was proper here. The Court also considered whether the district court violated the defendant's rights under the Confrontation Clause by allowing a witness to testify via a two-way video and limiting cross-examination to protect proprietary trade secrets. The Court determined that the district court failed to make express findings under Lipitz. The Court also concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion by limiting witness testimony. No reversal was granted, and the court …

Cross-Examination Content And The "Power Of Not", Patrick C. Brayer

Faculty Works

One of the challenges in constructing an impactful cross-examination (cross) is creating content. Many trial attorneys can effectively identify issues in the discovery process but fail to communicate to the fact finder the power of the facts as they relate to the case. Depositions can be artfully conducted and interrogatories expertly administered, but if the presenter of the evidence is unable to translate basic facts into vivid images and stories, then once-dominant discovery revelations can often be reduced to tepid references. After years of preparing one case, many trial attorneys are so hardened to the basic facts that they fail …

A Dog's Bark To Act As A Nark, Bailey R. Geller

Arkansas Law Review

This Comment therefore advocates for systemic reconsideration of dog scent lineups at trial. It will not claim that all dog scent lineups are flawless, particularly given the slipshod manner in which many are performed. But dog scent identifications are increasingly more valuable than our legal system currently acknowledges when they are properly conducted. They should be admissible.

Private Search And Seizure: The Constitutionality Of Anton Piller Orders In Canada, Dimitros Valkanas

Dalhousie Law Journal

This paper examines the constitutionality of the Anton Piller order in Canadian law. First, the paper examines whether Anton Piller orders overall are unconstitutional through three major avenues of attack: (i) Charter challenges; (ii) the ultra vires doctrine; and (iii) the principle of natural justice, audi alteram partem. Afterwards, in the event that no challenge against Anton Piller orders broadly would succeed, the paper examines whether their uniquely Canadian variant known as a “rolling” or “John (or Jane) Doe” Anton Piller orders could be challenged, looking at both Charter and non-Charter challenges. Finally, this paper proposes the imposition of additional …

The “Fool’S Gold” Standard Of Confession Evidence: How Intersecting, Disadvantaged Identities Heighten The Risk Of False Confession, Nicole Weis

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Defense Counsel’S Cross Purposes: Prior Conviction Impeachment Of Prosecution Witnesses, Anna Roberts

Brooklyn Law Review

A broad scholarly coalition supports the prohibition or diminution of the impeachment of criminal defendants with their convictions. Yet scholars should pay more attention to the flipside arrangement: impeachment of prosecution witnesses by defense counsel. First, because those engaged in reform efforts need to resolve the competing interests: constitutional arguments on behalf of the defense, but, on the other hand, concerns about a tool that (regardless of the nature of the witness) risks reinforcing biases and stereotypes. Second, because the impossibility of adequate resolution is itself important to note. Whether one considers the conflicting values of rule-makers deciding whether to …

What Are Victim Impact Statements For?, Susan A. Bandes

Brooklyn Law Review

In Payne v. Tennessee, the US Supreme Court upheld the admission of victim impact statements (VIS) on the ground that they provide valuable information to the sentencer. In the three decades since, two additional rationales for VIS have become ascendant: most prominently, a therapeutic rationale, and more recently, a public education rationale. In this article, I expand upon my critiques of the informational and therapeutic rationales in light of a growing body of empirical evidence about how VIS affect both sentencers and crime victims. Focusing on the powerful and viral VIS delivered at the Larry Nassar guilty plea hearings and …

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

Law Faculty Publications

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. Technology is a fork in the …

Demystifying Mindreading For The Law, Teneille R. Brown

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

To lawyers, mindreading conjures up flamboyant images of crystal balls or charlatans. However, it is a deeply serious endeavor for the law. The primary role of fact-finders in civil, criminal, and administrative trials in the United States is to serve as highly-regulated mind readers—to listen to the testimony and decide whether the witnesses are credible and telling the truth. Because it can be so easily biased, we must directly acknowledge how jurors and judges (in addition to voters and employers) automatically and imperfectly read minds. We must remove the “mystique of mindreading,” and see how ordinary assessments of mental states …

Evidence, W. Randall Bassett, Val Leppert, Lauren Newman Smith

Mercer Law Review

In its 2021 term, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued several important and precedential opinions on a number of evidentiary topics. For example, in two opinions, the court considered the totality of the evidence to determine whether admission of testimonial hearsay implicated the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause or was instead harmless error. The court also twice addressed whether a suggestion to the jury that a defendant’s silence was substantive evidence of his guilt violated the defendant’s Fifth Amendment rights.

Additionally, the Eleventh Circuit issued several opinions concerning lay witness and expert testimony. In two opinions …

Inevitable Change To Inevitable Discovery: The Eleventh Circuit’S New Standard Of Proof For Cases Addressing The Inevitable Discovery Exception To The Exclusionary Rule, Hannah Pressley

Mercer Law Review

The inevitable discovery doctrine is an exception to the rule that evidence obtained by the government in violation of the Fourth Amendment will be excluded at trial. Under the inevitable discovery doctrine, illegally obtained evidence will be admissible at trial if the government can establish that it would have discovered the evidence even if the Fourth Amendment violation had not occurred. In United States v. Watkins, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, sitting en banc, addressed the following question: what is the standard of proof that the government must meet to show that illegally obtained …

Overhauling Rules Of Evidence In Pro Se Courts, Andrew C. Budzinski

University of Richmond Law Review

State civil courtrooms are packed to the brim with litigants, but not with lawyers. Since the early 1990s, more and more litigants in state courts have appeared without legal counsel. Pro se litigation has grown consistently and enormously over the past few decades. State court dockets are dominated by cases brought by unrepresented litigants, most often in domestic violence, family law, landlord-tenant, and small claims courts.

Yet, the American courtroom is not designed for use by those unrepresented litigants—it is designed for use by attorneys. The American civil court is built upon a foundation of dense procedural rules, thick tomes …

“Rap Music On Trial”: Examining The Consequences Of Rap Lyrics Being Admissible At Trial, Malik Stewart

SLU Law Journal Online

Rap lyrics are being deemed admissible in court to convict criminal defendants. In this article, Malik Stewart considers the consequences of admitting rap lyrics to evidence to prove a defendant’s guilt, possible First Amendment violations, the efforts to prevent prosecutors from using rap lyrics as evidence, and the ways in which rap music is being targeted by prosecutors. The article also considers the emergence of Drill music and what to expect moving forward.

Can't We Just Talk About This First?: Making The Case For The Use Of Discovery Depositions In Arkansas Criminal Cases, Bryan Altman

Arkansas Law Review

“[T]he quest for better justice is a ceaseless quest, that the single constant for our profession is the need for continuous examination and reexamination of our premises as to what law should do to achieve better justice.” From time to time, it is important that we take stock of our legal surroundings and ask ourselves if our procedures are still properly serving us, or if there is need for change and improvement. In this Article, I argue that the time has come for Arkansas to provide the criminal defense bar with the affirmative power to conduct discovery depositions. Arkansas criminal …

Presuit Civil Protective Orders On Discovery, Jeffrey A. Parness

Georgia State University Law Review

There are few civil procedure laws broadly authorizing trial courts in the United States to consider presuit requests seeking protection from discovery sanctions or spoliation claims in later civil actions. There should be more laws on presuit protective orders addressing information maintenance, preservation, and production.

New presuit protective order laws are most apt where there have been demands by potential adversaries involving alleged information preservation duties under civil discovery laws or under substantive spoliation laws; where the recipients have strong reasons to secure early judicial clarifications; and where the availability and use of presuit protective orders will serve both private …