Evidence Commons^™

A New Exclusionary Rule To Protect Bodily Integrity And Discourage Pretext Stops, Josephine Ross

Seattle University Law Review

The author proposes a novel state-level exclusionary rule to reduce racial profiling and protect bodily autonomy during police encounters. The current Fourth Amendment jurisprudence fails to deter pretextual stops and frisks because the exclusionary rule often turns on officer fault and "good faith," allowing racially motivated practices to go unchecked. As federal rollbacks on diversity and data collection hinder efforts to track racial bias, the author argues for a statutory evidentiary rule that automatically excludes drug evidence found during (1) traffic stops, (2) pat-downs for weapons, and (3) consent searches, regardless of an officer’s intent or the legality of the …

Navahine V. HawaiʻI Dept. Of Transportation: The Keiki Will Lead Us, Catherine Smith

Seattle University Law Review

The author analyzes the landmark case Navahine v. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation, which culminated in the world’s first constitutional climate settlement. Catherine Smith, serving as an expert for the youth plaintiffs, situates the case within Hawaiʻi’s legal tradition of prioritizing children’s rights and intergenerational equity. She explores the evolution of children’s constitutional protections, contrasting Hawaiʻi’s progressive jurisprudence with the dominant adult-centric legal framework on the mainland. She critiques four recurring analytical missteps in U.S. courts that marginalize children’s interests and highlights Hawaiʻi’s public trust doctrine and cultural values, such as the Aloha Spirit, as models for addressing climate-related harms. …

Constitutional Futurism As Pedagogy, Jeremiah Chin

Seattle University Law Review

Constitutional Law has transformed from a course on history to a discussion of current events. Cases like Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo reveal that the study of constitutional law is not a static, or even linear, discussion of constitutional text and history. Law is a shifting, changing enterprise that reflects social constructions of power, authority, and identity. How do we teach, learn, and understand constitutional law that is so laden with history, riddled with theories of consistency and adherence to precedent, but ultimately subject …

Skirmishing Toward A General Theory Of Evidence And Proof, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Traditional probability fundamentally assumes bivalence and additivity: there is only truth and falsity, whose odds add to one. The consequence is many problems and paradoxes for factfinding, all attributable to the assumptions’ exclusive focus on random uncertainty. By contrast, multivalent belief theory abjures those two assumptions, thereby allowing consideration of epistemic uncertainty. This theory divides the factfinder’s state of mind into three, not two, gradated concepts: belief, uncommitted belief representing epistemic unknowns, and disbelief. This theory utilises a more general but perfectly valid logic that accounts for all relevant kinds of uncertainty and so explains the law’s wise practices. In …

A Beacon Trying To Signal Heading: The Ninth Circuit Interprets The California Whistleblower Protection Act In Killgore V. Specpro Professional Services, Llc, Naseem Memari

Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - )

No abstract provided.

The Overlooked Witness Memory Risk, Sue Provenzano, Sarah Brown-Schmidt

Faculty Publications By Year

No abstract provided.

The Objective Observer: The Washington State Supreme Court's Remedial Aspirations And Experience On The Ground, David B. Owens

Washington Law Review

The Washington State Supreme Court has adopted an “objective observer rule” for addressing whether race impacted jury selection and extended this rule to evaluating all aspects of Washington courts, including jury trials. The objective observer rule allows courts to evaluate whether decisions in those courtrooms could be viewed as the result of racial bias, even where there is no evidence of specific racial animus and in the absence of racial slurs. The rule, which covers a form of disparate impact, has now existed for over half a decade. This Article outlines the Washington State Supreme Court’s development of the objective …

How Experts View The Legal System's Use Of Scientific Evidence, Shari Seidman Diamond, Richard Lempert

Articles

Legal scholars and courts frequently write about how scientific evidence is vetted and presented in legal proceedings, but the views of experts themselves have received little attention. Our research aims to fill that gap. This paper reports some of what we learned from a series of surveys we conducted, beginning with a survey in 2016 of scientists who had been elected to membership in the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.3 Subsequent surveys were directed to subscribers of the journal Science who identified as scientists and engineers and to self-identified experts who advertised their availability as experts to lawyers or …

Say It Once, Say It Twice: Abrogating The Rebuttal Requirement Of The Prior Consistent Statement Hearsay Rule, Natashja Atherton

Pepperdine Law Review

Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) limits the introduction of a witness’s prior statements during court proceedings, even if those statements are consistent with the witness’s in-court testimony. A witness’s previous declarations can only be solicited if (a) the adversarial party directly attacks the witness’s credibility and (b) the offered prior consistent statement directly rebuts the basis of the attack. This Comment refers to these restrictions as the “rebuttal requirement” of Rule 801(d)(1)(B) and argues for its revocation to make statements substantially consistent with a witness’s in-court testimony admissible, subject to the other rules of evidence, regardless of whether the witness’s …

The Rape Kit Backlog: Problems And Solutions, Tracey Cao

Themis: Research Journal of Justice Studies and Forensic Science

This literature review examines the ongoing issue of rape kit backlog in the United States. Rape kits are a means of evidence collection from victims of sexual assault that can be used in court. Across the nation, many state jurisdictions have hundreds and thousands of rape kits left untested and locked away in storage facilities. Consent for testing, police bias, and funding issues are the main issues that will be addressed. Many victims choose not to have their kits tested. Other kits never get tested due to police choosing not to submit a kit due to their bias against some …

Privileged Communications: A Case By Case Approach, Josephine Citron

Maine Law Review

Privileged communications are communications which, because of a special relationship, are protected from revelation during the course of litigation. In the past, grants of privilege have been made by reference to professional groups rather than to the content of the particular communication, resulting in inconsistent treatment. Some professionals have secured absolute privileges for their relationships while others have been partially or totally unsuccessful. The inconsistencies are most clearly demonstrated by examining grants of privilege to medical, psychotherapeutic, and social work personnel, although it is not intended that the case by case approach suggested in the proposed statute at the end …

Preliminary Questions Of Fact: Respective Roles Of Judge And Jury In Maine Courts, Maine Law Review

Maine Law Review

Virtually indisputable in the law is the notion that the trial judge determines questions of admissibility of evidence. However, when admissibility depends upon the evaluation of a preliminary question of fact, both courts and commentators disagree as to whether the judge should continue to occupy the role of sole decision-maker. The intertwining of fact, the preliminary condition, and law, the admissibility decision, raises some havoc with accepted views of the judge as arbiter of the law and the jury as fact finder. If the judge determines both questions, he is resolving not only legal, but also factual issues traditionally within …

No Lawyer, No Jail: A Critical Case Study Of Pragmatism And The Flaws Of “Purposeful” Decision Making In Argersinger V. Hamlin, Alisa Smith, Sarah K. Stice

Seattle University Law Review

By releasing conference notes and internal communications, Supreme Court Justices provide insight into the otherwise private decisionmaking process, shedding light on how case outcomes and legal reasoning are framed and negotiated. The watershed case of Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972) extended the constitutional right to counsel to some, but not all, misdemeanor defendants. The case was argued twice, and the Court relied on empirical and authoritative sources to answer complex and practical questions about requiring counsel. This case study employs critical discourse analysis to uncover what influenced the Justices’ decisions and how they framed, shaped, and constructed social realities to foreground …

The Race To Erase: Destruction Of Government Documents Undermines Freedom-Of-Information Laws, Frank D. Lomonte

Seattle University Law Review

In August 2019, reporters with Chattanooga’s daily newspaper, the Times Free Press, filed what seemed to be a routine request for access to emails and other public records held by their local county government. The seemingly unremarkable request set the newspaper’s staff on a months-long journey of unpleasant surprises. The first was a demand to pay the county $717 in advance before being allowed to inspect the documents. The second was that—during prolonged haggling over the fee assessment— the county attorney’s office simply destroyed almost all of the disputed records. Third, and most glaringly, the journalists discovered that Tennessee law …

When You’Re Arrested For A Felony In Seattle, You’Ll Meet Me., Austin Field

Seattle University Law Review

In this Essay, Austin Field, a practicing public defender, uses a first-person perspective to describe what it is like to meet a criminal defendant for the first time. He explains the process from start to finish, detailing everything from the way he introduces himself to how bail works.

"I’ll ask you for your name. Most of the time, you tell me. I check your name against my list. On any given day I’m supposed to interview between five and fifteen people. I have a lot of questions for you. We only have about ten minutes."

The Public Square In A Private-Property Obsessed Country: What New York City’S Pops Regulations Get Right And Why Other Cities Should (Mostly) Copy Them, Carson Mcgregor

Seattle University Law Review

When New York City (NYC) was first becoming the metropolitan monolith it is today, it had a problem: the city streets were chock full of skyscrapers, and sunlight, air, and usable open space were at a premium. In response, the City promulgated its first Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS) regulations, which allowed developers to build skyward in exchange for providing public space on the street level. Unfortunately, in July of 2023, the New York Times (NYT) discovered that New Yorkers received only a fraction of what they were promised. Building owners received billions of dollars’ worth of added floor space, …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Defining Deference: Impacts Of Abandoning Chevron On Emerging Technology Governance And Administrative Law, R. Aubrey Davis Iii

Seattle University Law Review

Emerging technologies, particularly Artificial Intelligence (AI), often lead to unforeseen legal outcomes. Notable abuses in areas such as facial recognition, employment bias, and housing discrimination are well known. However, legislative responses to these issues either have been largely reactive or there has been no legislative response at all. In lieu of legislation, agencies have sought to fill the gap. For example, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently proposed a rule mandating voter notification for all AI-generated political phone calls citing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) of 1991 as authority. However, the TCPA was originally passed to curtail telemarketing, not …

Intellectual Property Or Modern Folklore? The Problem With Open Gaming Licenses In Tabletop Gaming, Rosie Midget

Seattle University Law Review

This Note addresses how courts and legislatures should address “Open Gaming Licenses” commonly attached to tabletop roleplaying games (TTRPGs), which game publishers use to promote a false image of accessibility—misleading consumers and building goodwill from the misunderstanding. Part I discusses what TTRPGs are, including the defining features of the hobby and culture surrounding it, as well as the unique interplay between publishers and players. Part II explores the question of which elements in a TTRPG system may be subject to copyright protection. Part III examines these elements in practice using Wizards of the Coast’s Dungeons and Dragons TTRPG as a …

Modern Day Colonialism Through HawaiʻI’S Quiet Title And Partition Laws, Cheyann Fujii

Seattle University Law Review

This Note will attempt to highlight important aspects of Hawaiian history to provide readers with a clear picture on how Native Hawaiians are still impacted by colonialism, specifically when plaintiffs bring a quiet title or partition action against Native Hawaiian owners of kuleana lands. Before colonization, the concept of private land ownership did not exist in Hawai‘i, and Native Hawaiians adopted a feudal system by dividing land into geographical areas. Missionaries and businessmen brought Western ideas to Hawai‘i and influenced legislation such as the Great Māhele and the Kuleana Land Act of 1850, which solidified the concept of private property. …