Continuing Evolution Of Juvenile Sentencing Laws,
2019
University of Arkansas Little Rock
Continuing Evolution Of Juvenile Sentencing Laws, Misty Wilson Borkowski
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Goat Testicles, Scientific Evidence, And Consequences: Stopping A Killing Spree With Nothing But Evidence Law,
2019
University of Arkansas Little Rock
Goat Testicles, Scientific Evidence, And Consequences: Stopping A Killing Spree With Nothing But Evidence Law, William Gordon Childs
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Climate Of Fear: Admission Of Prior Bad Acts To Establish Coercion In Human Trafficking Cases,
2019
Harvard Law School
Climate Of Fear: Admission Of Prior Bad Acts To Establish Coercion In Human Trafficking Cases, Masha Simonova
Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice
The article argues that evidence of a defendant's prior bad acts, such as gang membership or violent behavior, should be admissible in human trafficking cases to establish coercion. This evidence is crucial for demonstrating the "climate of fear" created by traffickers, which is central to proving coercion under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). The author contends that such evidence is not only intrinsic to the crime but also admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) for permissible purposes, such as proving intent, knowledge, or modus operandi.
Table Of Contents,
2019
Seattle University School of Law
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Why Do We Admit Criminal Confessions Into Evidence?,
2019
Seattle University School of Law
Why Do We Admit Criminal Confessions Into Evidence?, David Crump
Seattle University Law Review
There is an enormous literature about the admissibility of criminal confessions. But almost all of it deals with issues related to self-incrimination or, to a lesser extent, with hearsay or accuracy concerns. As a result, the question whether we ever admit criminal confessions into evidence has not been the subject of much analysis. This gap is odd, since confessions are implicitly disfavored by a proportion of the literature and they often collide with exclusionary doctrines. Furthermore, the self-incrimination issue sometimes is resolved by balancing, and it would help if we knew what we were balancing. Therefore, one might ask: Why …
Menendez-Cordero V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 29 (Jul 25, 2019),
2019
University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law
Menendez-Cordero V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 29 (Jul 25, 2019), Nick Hagenkord
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court concluded that (1) the empanelment of an anonymous jury does not, without actual prejudice, infringe on a defendant’s constitutional rights and the district court satisfied the abuse-of-discretion standard adopted; (2) the district court need not instruct a jury that is responsible for imposing a sentence in a first-degree murder case under NRS 175.552 about the effects of a deadly weapon enhancement; and (3) there was no abuse of discretion in the district court’s decision to admit Menendez-Cordero’s threats as consciousness-of-guilt evidence.
Staying Faithful To The Standards Of Proof,
2019
Cornell Law School
Staying Faithful To The Standards Of Proof, Kevin M. Clermont
Cornell Law Review
Academics have never quite understood the standards of proof or, indeed, much about the theory of proof Their formulations beget probabilistic musings, which beget all sorts of paradoxes, which in turn beget radical reconceptions and proposals for reform. The theoretical radicals argue that the law needs some basic reconception such as recognizing the aim of legal proof as not at all a search for truth but rather the production of an acceptable result, or that the law needs some shattering reform such as greatly heightening the civil standard of proof on each part of the case to ensure a more-likely …
Due Process People V. Scott (Decided June 5, 1996),
2019
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Due Process People V. Scott (Decided June 5, 1996)
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
An Examination Of Computer Forensics And Related Certifications In The Accounting Curriculum,
2019
Stockton University
An Examination Of Computer Forensics And Related Certifications In The Accounting Curriculum, Michael A. Seda, Bonita Peterson Kramer, D. Larry Crumbley
Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law
Forensic accounting has been a fast-growing niche area within the accounting field for many years. While there has been dramatic growth in the number of courses and degrees in forensic accounting offered by universities, certain relevant topics receive little coverage, such as computer forensics. The purpose of this paper is to examine the views of accounting academics and practitioners pertaining to integrating computer forensics in the accounting curriculum, as well as to determine which forensic accounting certifications the respondents hold. Differences in opinions between the two groups are discussed, along with recommendations on how to improve the forensic accounting curriculum …
Judges Versus Jurors: Biased Attributions In The Courtroom,
2019
Visiting Researcher, Cornell Law School
Judges Versus Jurors: Biased Attributions In The Courtroom, Goran Dominioni, Pieter Desmet, Louis Visscher
Cornell International Law Journal
The fundamental purpose of a tort trial is to allocate responsibility. However, attributing fault is difficult, and decades of research in psychology have shown that human beings are prone to make systematic errors in performing this task. What can be done about this? The United States and countries in continental Europe adopt diametrically opposed strategies to reduce errors in the attribution of responsibility in the courtroom. American law delegates fact-finding to jurors and makes some type of evidence inadmissible in court to protect jurors from potentially biasing information, such as character evidence. European legal systems, instead, employ almost exclusively judges …
Pharmaceutical Industry Funding To Patient-Advocacy Organization: A Cross-National Comparison Of Disclosure Codes And Regulation,
2019
University of Miami School of Law
Pharmaceutical Industry Funding To Patient-Advocacy Organization: A Cross-National Comparison Of Disclosure Codes And Regulation, Laura Karas, Robin Feldman, Bai Ge, So Yeon Kang, Gerard F. Anderson
Articles
Transparency has become one of the primary themes in health care reform efforts in the United States and across the world. In the face of exorbitant drug prices, high levels of patient cost-sharing, and pharmaceutical expenditures that consume a growing proportion of public sector budgets, much attention has been drawn to the pharmaceutical industry. Congressional investigations, academic publications, and news articles have endeavored to reveal the extent of drug and device industry influence on health care actors. In response, several nations, including the United States, have passed legislation mandating disclosure of drug company payments to physicians. In the United States, …
New Juvenile Discovery Rules: Mandatory, Comprehensive, And Streamlined.,
2019
University of Michigan Law School
New Juvenile Discovery Rules: Mandatory, Comprehensive, And Streamlined., Joshua B. Kay
Articles
The recently promulgated amendments and additions to the civil discovery rules include several changes affecting child protection and juvenile delinquency proceedings.1 The updates should make discovery in juvenile court matters more efficient by clarifying what is discoverable and requiring more timely exchange of information.
Can You Hear Me Now: The Impacts Of Prosecutorial Call Monitoring On Defendants' Access To Justice,
2019
University of South Carolina
Can You Hear Me Now: The Impacts Of Prosecutorial Call Monitoring On Defendants' Access To Justice, Hope L. Demer
South Carolina Law Review
No abstract provided.
Forensic Science Evidence And The Limits Of Cross-Examination,
2019
Allard School of Law at the University of British Columbia
Forensic Science Evidence And The Limits Of Cross-Examination, Gary Edmond, Emma Cunliffe, Kristy Martire, Mehera San Roque
All Faculty Publications
The ability to confront witnesses through cross-examination is conventionally understood as the most powerful means of testing evidence, and one of the most important features of the adversarial trial. Popularly feted, cross-examination was immortalised in John Henry Wigmore’s (1863–1943) famous dictum that it is ‘the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth’. Through a detailed review of the cross-examination of a forensic scientist, in the first scientifically-informed challenge to latent fingerprint evidence in Australia, this article offers a more modest assessment of its value. Drawing upon mainstream scientific research and advice, and contrasting scientific knowledge with answers …
Maryland Makes New Evidence Postconviction Review Provisions Available To Defendants With Plea Deals,
2019
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
Maryland Makes New Evidence Postconviction Review Provisions Available To Defendants With Plea Deals, Felicia Langel
Maryland Law Review Online
No abstract provided.
Social Media, Venue And The Right To A Fair Trial,
2019
Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University
Social Media, Venue And The Right To A Fair Trial, Leslie Y. Garfield Tenzer
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
Judicial failure to recognize social media's influence on juror decision making has identifiable constitutional implications. The Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial demands that courts grant a defendant's change of venue motion when media-generated pretrial publicity invades the unbiased sensibility of those who are asked to sit in judgment. Courts limit publicity suitable for granting a defendant's motion to information culled from newspapers, radio, and television reports. Since about 2014, however, a handful of defendants have introduced social media posts to support their claims of unconstitutional bias in the community. Despite defendants' introduction of negative social media in support …
The Courtroom Turned Classroom: A Model Procedure For Educating The Gatekeepers Of Expert Evidence In Complex Toxic Tort Cases,
2019
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
The Courtroom Turned Classroom: A Model Procedure For Educating The Gatekeepers Of Expert Evidence In Complex Toxic Tort Cases, Izabelle Tully
Cardozo Law Review
This Note maintains that in order for Rule 702 and the Daubert standard to have their intended effect, judges need more guidance and structure in how they approach scientific admissibility decisions. An analysis of how courts following Daubert currently address novel science, specifically in toxic tort cases where some members of the scientific community label causation evidence as junk science, supports this argument. This Note will focus on procedures courts have used to make gatekeeping decisions. From a study of these procedures, this Note will suggest a model framework that courts should employ to tackle novel science issues in mass …
Justice Begins Before Trial: How To Nudge Inaccurate Pretrial Rulings Using Behavioral Law And Economic Theory And Uniform Commercial Laws,
2019
William & Mary Law School
Justice Begins Before Trial: How To Nudge Inaccurate Pretrial Rulings Using Behavioral Law And Economic Theory And Uniform Commercial Laws, Michael Gentithes
William & Mary Law Review
Injustice in criminal cases often takes root before trial begins. Overworked criminal judges must resolve difficult pretrial evidentiary issues that determine the charges the State will take to trial and the range of sentences the defendant will face. Wrong decisions on these issues often lead to wrongful convictions. As behavioral law and economic theory suggests, judges who are cognitively busy and receive little feedback on these topics from appellate courts rely upon intuition, rather than deliberative reasoning, to resolve these questions. This leads to inconsistent rulings, which prosecutors exploit to expand the scope of evidentiary exceptions that almost always disfavor …
Beyond The Witness: Bringing A Process Perspective To Modern Evidence Law,
2019
Texas A&M University School of Law
Beyond The Witness: Bringing A Process Perspective To Modern Evidence Law, Edward K. Cheng, G. Alexander Nunn
Faculty Scholarship
The focal point of the modern trial is the witness. Witnesses are the source of observations, lay and expert opinions, authentication, as well as the conduit through which documentary, physical, and scientific evidence is introduced. Evidence law therefore unsurprisingly concentrates on – or perhaps obsesses over – witnesses. In this Article, we argue that this witness-centered perspective is antiquated and counterproductive. As a historical matter, focusing on witnesses may have made sense when most evidence was the product of individual observation and action. But the modern world frequently features evidence produced through standardized, objective, and even mechanical processes that largely …
Beyond The Witness: Bringing A Process Perspective,
2019
Vanderbilt University Law School
Beyond The Witness: Bringing A Process Perspective, Edward K. Cheng, G. Alexander Nunn
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
For centuries, the foundation of the Anglo-American trial has been the witness.' Witnesses report on their personal observations, provide opinions of character, offer scientific explanations, and in the case of parties, narrate their own story. Indeed, even for documentary and other physical evidence, witnesses often provide the conduit through which such evidence reaches the factfinder. Documentary or physical evidence rarely stands on its own. The law of evidence has thus unsurprisingly focused on-or perhaps obsessed over-witnesses. The hearsay rule and the Confrontation Clause demand that declarants be available witnesses at trial so that they may be subject to cross-examination.' Expert …
