Evidence Commons^™

Model Draft Of A Rule 502(D) Order, Symposium Participants

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Enter The Order, Protect The Privilege: Considerations For Courts Entering Protective Orders Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 502(D), Edwin M. Buffmire

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Rulemakers’ Laments, Richard Marcus

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is It Safe? The Need For State Ethical Rules To Keep Pace With Technological Advances, Ann M. Murphy

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Making Horses Drink: Conceptual Change Theory And Federal Rule Of Evidence 502, Liesa L. Richter

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Panel Discussion: Reinvigorating Rule 502, Panel Discussion

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Evidence Rule 502: The Solution To The Privilege-Protection Puzzle In The Digital Era, John M. Barkett

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reconceptualizing The Burden Of Proof, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The preponderance standard is conventionally described as an absolute probability threshold of 0.5. This Essay argues that this absolute characterization of the burden of proof is wrong. Rather than focusing on an absolute threshold, the Essay reconceptualizes the preponderance standard as a probability ratio and shows how doing so eliminates many of the classical problems associated with probabilistic theories of evidence. Using probability ratios eliminates the so-called Conjunction Paradox, and developing the ratio tests under a Bayesian perspective further explains the Blue Bus problem and other puzzles surrounding statistical evidence. By harmonizing probabilistic theories of proof with recent critiques advocating …

The 2012 Amendments To Singapore's Evidence Act: More Questions Than Answers As Regards Expert Opionion Evidence?, Siyuan Chen

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Singapore amended the expert opinion evidence provisions in its Evidence Act (EA) in 2012. The criteria for admissibility have been broadened, but the courts are now also expressly given the discretion to exclude relevant expert opinion evidence if it is ‘in the interests of justice’. This article explains why the 2012 amendments have raised more questions than answered them. First, Parliament did not appear to have properly appreciated the distinction—as conceptualised by the EA—between legal and logical relevance and relevance and admissibility. Second, it did not appear to have appreciated the distinction between general and specific relevance. Third, the introduction …

Doe Co., Ltd V. Doe, Uzi Vogelman, Isaac Amit, Esther Hayut

Translated Opinions

[This abstract is not part of the Court's opinion and is provided for the reader's convenience. It has been translated from a Hebrew version prepared by Nevo Press Ltd. and is used with its kind permission.]

The Supreme Court (Justice Vogelman, Justices Hayut and Amit, concurring) granted leave to appeal, upheld the appeal and ruled as follows.

The Court considered the proceedings on the premise that the provisions of section 70(e1) of the Courts Act [Consolidated Version], 5744-1984 (hereinafter – the “Act”), which refers to a “suspect” as defined in section 70(e2) of the Act “as someone against whom a …

Comments On Maryland V. King In 'U.S. Supreme Court To Hear Arguments Over Md. Dna Case: Justices' Decision Will Have National Implications On Future Crime-Fighting Procedures', Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Amending For Justice’S Sake: Codified Disclosure Rule Needed To Provide Guidance To Prosecutor’S Duty To Disclose, Nathan A. Frazier

Florida Law Review

This Note argues for the implementation of bright-line rules to guide prosecutorial discretion. It urges a solution that identifies the salient facts from the case law and enumerates those facts into a codified Strickler three-prong standard. A bright-line standard should exist requiring disclosure when any of the following scenarios are present: (1) Prior perjury or false testimony of a government witness; (2) Promises of immunity to a government witness; (3) Monetary rewards to key government witnesses; (4) Mental impairments of a government witness; (5) Information reflecting bias or prejudice of a government witness against defendant; (6) Confessions to the crime …

The White Interest In School Integration, Robert A. Garda Jr.

Florida Law Review

Discussions concerning desegregation, affirmative action, and voluntary integration focus primarily, if not exclusively, on whether such policies harm or benefit minorities. Scant attention is paid to the benefits whites receive in multiracial schools, despite white interests underpinning more than thirty years of Supreme Court integration jurisprudence. In this Article, I explore the academic and social benefits whites receive in multiracial schools, and I do so from a white parent’s perspective. The Article begins by describing the interest-convergence theory and how white interests explain the course and content of the Supreme Court’s desegregation and affirmative action jurisprudence. Multiracial schools will not …

Comment On The Proposed Amendment To Evidence Rule 801(D)(1)(B), Liesa L. Richter

Other Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Drug Use And The Exclusionary Manque, Jerome A. Busch

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States V. Salvucci: The Problematic Absence Of Automatic Standing, William C. Bollard

Pepperdine Law Review

The United States Supreme Court recently abolished the automatic standing rule in United States v. Salvucci. The author analyzes the difficulties created for the criminal defendant charged with a possessory crime. In particular, this note focuses on the inequitable position the defendant is placed in when his suppression hearing testimony is used as a tool to impeach subsequent testimony offered at trial. The author continues by pointing out that the "prosecutorial self-contradiction," sought to be abolished in Salvucci, remains a part of our present judicial system. In conclusion, the author offers several considerations that will necessarily be an integral part …

New York V. Belton: The Scope Of Warrantless Searches Extended, Glenn D. Forcucci

Pepperdine Law Review

The United States Supreme Court, in New York v. Belton, expanded the area in which a policeman may search after he has made a lawful custodial arrest. In so ruling, the Supreme Court dramatically departed from its previous holding in Chimel v. California. While Chimel limited the area of the search to the area "within the immediate control of the arrestee," Belton allowed a search outside of that established boundary, as the Supreme Court allowed the search to include the passenger compartment of an automobile which the arrestee had not occupied.

Admissibility Of Illegally Seized Evidence In Civil Cases: Could This Be The Path Out Of The Labyrinth Of The Exclusionary Rule?, Richard J. Hanscom

Pepperdine Law Review

The use of the exclusionary rule in criminal cases has been the subject of extensive debate since its inception. Although most efforts to modify the rule have been deemed unworkable, the author proposes a modification that is both workable and sensible. Modification would be accomplished by legislation which admits the results of illegal searches by law enforcement officers who acted in good faith, and, at the same time, provide fixed monetary sanctions against the governmental agencies whose officers conducted the search. The author proposes a good faith balancing test to determine evidence admissibility and administrative type proceedings to determine monetary …

The Use Of Aviation Accident Reports By Civil Litigants: The Historical Development Of 49 U.S.C. Section 1441(E), Walter A. T. Welch Jr., John E. Faulk

Pepperdine Law Review

When aviation accidents occur, the National Transportation Safety Board conducts an investigation to determine the conditions, circumstances, and ultimately the probable cause of the accident. There is a federal statutory privilege which renders these reports, as well as testimony from the attending investigator, inadmissible as evidence in any suit or action arising from the accident. However, certain judicially created exceptions have arisen which permit portions of the report and certain investigator testimony to be admitted into evidence. The authors delineate and analyze these exceptions as they discuss the trend toward increased report and testimony admissibility. The authors conclude with a …

Understanding Admissibility Of Prior Bad Acts: A Diagrammatic Approach, William Roth

Pepperdine Law Review

One of the most misunderstood areas of evidence in criminal cases is the admissibility of a defendant's prior bad acts. This article discusses both the practical and theoretical perspectives of prior bad acts and presents a diagram of the different admissibility theories. This visual aid is a great step forward in simplifying this problematic area.