Promising Protection: 911 Call Records As Foundation For Family Violence Intervention,
2013
William & Mary Law School
Promising Protection: 911 Call Records As Foundation For Family Violence Intervention, James G. Dwyer
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The Legality Of Deliberate Miranda Violations: How Two-Step National Security Interrogations Undermine Miranda And Destabilize Fifth Amendment Protections,
2013
University of Michigan Law School
The Legality Of Deliberate Miranda Violations: How Two-Step National Security Interrogations Undermine Miranda And Destabilize Fifth Amendment Protections, Lee Ross Crain
Michigan Law Review
As part of the global “War on Terror,” federal agents intentionally delay issuing Miranda warnings to terrorism suspects during custodial interrogations. They delay the warnings presuming that unwarned suspects will more freely offer vital national security intelligence. After a suspect offers the information he has, agents administer Miranda warnings and attempt to elicit confessions that prosecutors can use at the suspect’s trial. No court has ruled on the constitutionality of this two-step national security interrogation process to determine whether admitting the second, warned confession is allowed under Miranda v. Arizona and its progeny. A fragmented Supreme Court examined two-step interrogations …
Summary Of Perez V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 90,
2013
Nevada Law Journal
Summary Of Perez V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 90, Collin Jayne
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined the admissibility of expert testimony on “grooming behavior” by accused sexual offenders and the effect that this behavior has on child victims.
Character, Liberalism, And The Protean Culture Of Evidence Law,
2013
Seattle University School of Law
Character, Liberalism, And The Protean Culture Of Evidence Law, Daniel D. Blinka
Seattle University Law Review
It is time to rethink character evidence. Long notorious as the most frequently litigated evidence issue, character doctrine plagues courts, trial lawyers, and law students with its infamously “grotesque” array of nonsensical rules, whimsical distinctions, and arcane procedures. Character is a calculation of social worth and value; it is the sum total of what others think of us, whether expressed as their own opinion or the collective opinions of many (reputation). Once we grasp that character is a social construct, we are in a better position to address some of the problems that plague evidence law. To provide needed clarity …
Is Expert Evidence Really Different?,
2013
University of Virginia School of Law
Is Expert Evidence Really Different?, Frederick Schauer, Barbara A. Spellman
Notre Dame Law Review
The problem with expert evidence is not the inappropriateness of the Daubert approach. The narrow focus on Daubert is misplaced. The real problem is with the more deeply entrenched view that expert evidence should be excluded under circumstances in which analogous non-expert evidence would be admitted. Daubert embodies the distinction between expert and non-expert evidence, but it is that very distinction, and not just Daubert, that is the problem. Daubert has indeed transformed modern evidence law, but perhaps it has awakened us to the need for a more profound transformation, one in which the very foundations of treating expert …
The Misbegotten Judicial Resistance To The Daubert Revolution,
2013
George Mason University School of Law
The Misbegotten Judicial Resistance To The Daubert Revolution, David E. Bernstein
Notre Dame Law Review
This Article reviews the history of the evolution of the rules for the admissibility of expert testimony since the 1980s, the revolutionary nature of what ultimately emerged, and the consistent efforts by recalcitrant judges to stop or roll back the changes, even after Rule 702 was amended to explicitly incorporate a strict interpretation of those changes.
Part I reviews the law of expert testimony through the Supreme Court’s Daubert decision. Critics had charged for decades that the adversarial system was a failure with regard to expert testimony. Parties to litigation, they argued, often presented expert testimony of dubious validity because …
"As I Lay Dying:" A Halloween Meditation On The Use Of Dying Declarations In Montana,
2013
Alexander Blewett III School of Law at the University of Montana
"As I Lay Dying:" A Halloween Meditation On The Use Of Dying Declarations In Montana, Cynthia Ford
Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings
This article discusses the Montana hearsay exception for "dying declarations."
Ehearsay,
2013
William & Mary Law School
Masquerading Justiciability: The Misapplication Of State Secrets Privilege In Mohamed V. Jeppesen--Reflections From A Comparative Perspective,
2013
University of Georgia School of Law
Masquerading Justiciability: The Misapplication Of State Secrets Privilege In Mohamed V. Jeppesen--Reflections From A Comparative Perspective, Galit Raguan
Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law
No abstract provided.
Rape Shield Laws And The Social Media Revolution: Discoverability Of Social Media--It's Not Private,
2013
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Rape Shield Laws And The Social Media Revolution: Discoverability Of Social Media--It's Not Private, Seth I. Koslow
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Supplementing The Record In The Federal Courts Of Appeals: What If The Evidence You Need Is Not In The Record?,
2013
University of Arkansas Little Rock
Supplementing The Record In The Federal Courts Of Appeals: What If The Evidence You Need Is Not In The Record?, George C. Harris, Xiang Li
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
E-Discovery 2.0,
2013
University of Missouri - Kansas City, School of Law
Being Pragmatic About Forensic Linguistics,
2013
Vanderbilt University Law School
Being Pragmatic About Forensic Linguistics, Edward K. Cheng
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
This article aims to provide some legal context to the Authorship Attribution Workshop (“conference”). In particular, I want to offer some pragmatic observations on what courts will likely demand of forensic linguistics experts and tentatively suggest what the field should aspire to in both the short and long run.
We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together: Domestic Violence Victims, Defendants, And Due Process,
2013
Seton Hall University School of Law
We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together: Domestic Violence Victims, Defendants, And Due Process, Jessica Miles
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Amici Curiae In Support Of Appellant, James Townsend V. Midland Funding, Llc,
2013
AARP Foundation Litigation
Brief Of Amici Curiae In Support Of Appellant, James Townsend V. Midland Funding, Llc, Stuart Robert Cohen, Peter A. Holland
Court Briefs
The Consumer Protection Clinic of the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, filed a Motion to Participate and an Amicus Brief in the case of Townsend v. Midland Funding, LLC. The case presents the question of whether documents created by third party predecessors in interest—usually a bank—may be admitted into evidence when a debt buyer plaintiff does not demonstrate personal knowledge regarding any of the foundational elements which would be required to admit the documents under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. Amici urge the Court to overturn the lower court, and hold that a …
The Reliability And Admissibility Of Fingerprint And Bitemark Analyses,
2013
University at Buffalo School of Law
The Reliability And Admissibility Of Fingerprint And Bitemark Analyses, David Chandler
Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Testifying Minors: Pre-Trial Strategies To Reduce Anxiety In Child Witnesses,
2013
University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law
Testifying Minors: Pre-Trial Strategies To Reduce Anxiety In Child Witnesses, Dawn Hathaway Thoman
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Adaptation And The Courtroom: Judging Climate Science,
2013
University of Arizona College of Law
Adaptation And The Courtroom: Judging Climate Science, Kirsten Engel, Jonathan Overpeck
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
Climate science is increasingly showing up in courtroom disputes over the duty to adapt to climate change. While judges play a critical role in evaluating scientific evidence, they are not apt to be familiar with the basic methods of climate science nor with the role played by peer review, publication, and training of climate scientists. This Article is an attempt to educate the bench and the bar on the basics of the discipline of climate science, which we contend is a distinct scientific discipline. We propose a series of principles to guide a judge’s evaluation of the reliability and weight …
The Future Of The Similar Fact Rule In An Indian Evidence Act Jurisdiction: Singapore,
2013
Singapore Management University
The Future Of The Similar Fact Rule In An Indian Evidence Act Jurisdiction: Singapore, Siyuan Chen
Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law
In yet another attempt to bridge the gap between the rules of an antiquated statute and the modern realities of practice, Singapore’s Evidence Act was amended in 2012. Certain relevancy provisions were amended to allow greater admissibility of evidence. While new provisions were introduced to act as a check against abuse, oddly some similar fact provisions were left intact. This paper explains why the 2012 amendments have rendered the future of these enactments very uncertain. This paper also suggests a number of tentative recommendations as regards future legislative change or judicial interpretation. To the extent that Singapore’s Evidence Act was …
Summary Of Holmes V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 59,
2013
Nevada Law Journal
Summary Of Holmes V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 59, Brian Vasek
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined whether the fairness of a criminal trial was compromised by the district court’s admission into evidence of: (1) rap lyrics that the accused wrote while in jail; (2) a co-conspirator’s out-of-court statement that the accused “went off” and “just started shooting”; and (3) unwarned statements that the accused made to Nevada detectives who interviewed him out of state.
