Evidence Commons^™

Searching For Truth In The American Law Of Evidence And Proof, D. Michael Risinger

Georgia Law Review

The ideology of the trial process puts discovery of truth
at center stage. This is made clear by the language of
Federal Rule of Evidence 102, upon which New Georgia
Rule of Evidence 24-1-1 is obviously based. Both of these
rules make the ascertainment of truth one of the two goals
of the trial (just determination being the other). However,
the term "truth" has been used in many ways in many
different contexts and traditions. What notion of truth did
the drafters have in mind?
This Article answers that question by reference to what
has come to be known as …

The Curious Case Of Differing Literary Emphases: The Contrast Between The Use Of Scientific Publications At Pretrial Daubert Hearings And At Trial, Ronald L. Carlson

Georgia Law Review

An expert's testimony at a pretrial Daubert hearing is
frequently supported by professional writings. Technical
literature is employed by litigants to buttress controversial
scientific theories and research. By way of example, a
plaintiff's attorney may urge that an alleged toxic
substance caused his or her client's cancer. The objective
in providing the court with learned texts and articles is to
convince the trial judge to admit expert opinions that
support causation. This Article reports appellate opinions
that strongly encourage production of professional
writings in the pretrial context. Indeed, in several cases
the absence of published research resulted in defeat of …

The Epistemological Trend In The Evolution Of The Law Of Expert Testimony: A Scrutiny At Once Broader, Narrower, And Deeper, Edward J. Imwinkelried

Georgia Law Review

The thesis of this Article is that we are moving toward a
fundamentally epistemological approach to determining
the admissibility of expert testimony. The first part of the
Article notes that while many Frye jurisdictions exempted
soft science and nonscientific expertise, the Daubert line of
authority mandates that like an epistemologist, a trial
judge examine knowledge claims by any expert. The
second part addresses the question of the breadth of the
judge's analysis. The second part points out that under

the marketplace and general acceptance tests, courts
sometimes conducted a global analysis and inquired
generally whether the discipline itself was recognized …

A Tale Of Two Dauberts, Julie A. Seaman

Georgia Law Review

Under the Federal Rules of Evidence and Supreme
Court precedent, a single standard ostensibly governs the
admissibility of scientific and other expert evidence in
criminal and civil cases. Although Georgia has recently
become the forty-fourth state to adopt the Federal Rules of
Evidence, it has declined to adopt Daubert for criminal
cases and has retained the prior, more lenient, standard.
While many commentators view this approach as perverse,
this Article considers the possible virtues not only of
explicitly applying a separate rule to scientific evidence in
criminal cases but also of applying a less stringent rule to
such evidence. Based …

Shields, Swords, And Fulfilling The Exclusionary Rule's Deterrent Function, James L. Kainen

Faculty Scholarship

When the exclusionary rule prevents the prosecution from using evidence necessary to bring a case to trial, the rule deters illegality while raising no issue about how it might interfere with usual factfinding processes. However, when a case proceeds to trial although a court has suppressed some prosecution evidence, courts need to decide the extent to which the defendant may benefit from the absence of the proof without opening the door to its admission. The exclusion of any relevant evidence raises similar questions, and courts often say the exclusionary rule is a shield from suppressed evidence, but not a sword …

The (In)Admissibility Of False Confession Expert Testimony, David A. Perez

Touro Law Review

This Comment discusses the relationship between police interrogation tactics and false confessions in order to address the admissibility of false confession expert testimony, a question that has traditionally been left to the discretion of the trial judge. The current literature-indeed, the prevailing consensus-argues for drastic changes to police interrogation practices to prevent false confessions and, in combination with such changes, demands that expert testimony on false confessions be admitted in criminal trials. Despite the relative unanimity in the literature, state and federal courts remain bitterly divided on the question of admissibility of false confession expert testimony. Each decision in this …

Georgia's New Evidence Code: After The Celebration, A Serious Review Of Anticipated Subjects Of Litigation To Be Brought On By The New Legislation, Matthew E. Cook, K. Todd Butler

Mercer Law Review

As January 1, 2013 approaches, the Georgia Bar is anticipating the new Georgia Evidence Code (GEC), House Bill 24, due to take effect on that day. Several authors have canvassed the particular changes the GEC brings to the existing Georgia Rules, of Evidence, as well as the differences between the new GEC and the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE). Those articles are commended for your reading, as they drive not only lawyers' courtroom presentation but also their trial preparation. Rather than rehashing the changes the GEC brings, this Article will address the abbreviated history preceding the passage of House Bill …

Can Law And Literature Be Practical? The Crucible And The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Martin H. Pritikin

West Virginia Law Review

Counter-intuitively, one of the best ways to learn the practice-oriented topic of evidence may be by studying a work of fiction-specifically, Arthur Miller's The Crucible, which dramatizes the seventeenth-century Salem witch trials. The play puts the reader in the position of legal advocate, and invites strategic analysis of evidentiary issues. A close analysis of the dialogue presents an opportunity to explore both the doctrinal nuances of and policy considerations underlying the most important topics covered by the Federal Rules of Evidence, including the mode and order of interrogation, relevance, character evidence and impeachment, opinion testimony, and hearsay.

The Nursing Standard Of Care In Illinois: Rethinking The Wingo Exception In The Wake Of Sullivan V. Edward Hospital, Emily Chase-Sosnoff

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This note analyzes the current circuit split among Illinois courts over whether the same-license requirement for medical expert testimony applies to testimony about the standard of care for nurse-doctor communications. Part I traces the history of the problem by explaining the original same-license requirement, the Wingo exception for nurse-doctor communications, and the Illinois Supreme Court's decision in Sullivan, which cast doubt on Wingo's continued survival. Part II illustrates the nature of the circuit split by describing the lower courts' three distinct interpretations of Sullivan. Finally, Part III argues that courts should apply Sullivan strictly and abandon the Wingo exception because …

Evidence, John E. Hall Jr., W. Scott Henwood, Alex Battey

Mercer Law Review

This year represents the last survey period in which the "old" Georgia Evidence Code, Official Code of Georgia Annotated title 24, reigns. The "new" Georgia Evidence Code, which amends the O.C.G.A. and conforms in large part to the Federal Rules of Evidence, takes effect January 1, 2013. Therefore, next year's survey will undoubtedly report the ways in which Georgia courts have coped with the extensive changes. For now, courts continue to apply the existing Georgia Rules of Evidence. Cases covered in this Article were published between June 1, 2011 and May 31, 2012, and speak to a variety of topics …

The Incredible Shrinking Confrontation Clause, Jeffrey Bellin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Sharp turns in the Supreme Court's recent Confrontation Clause jurisprudence have left scholars reeling from conflicting emotions: exhilaration, despair, denial, and soon, perhaps, cynical acceptance. While most commentators celebrated the demise of the incoherent Ohio v. Roberts framework, their excitement largely faded as the Court's decisions in Davis v. Washington and Bryant v. Michigan revealed nascent flaws in the evolving doctrine and sharply curtailed the newly revitalized confrontation right.

Recent scholarship strives to reanimate the jurisprudence by expanding the doctrinal definition of "testimonial" statements - the sole form of evidence Associate Professor, William & Mary Law School. I would like …

Musical Copyright Infringement: The Replacement Of Arnstein V. Porter - A More Comprehensive Use Of Expert Testimony And The Implementation Of An "Actual Audience" Test , Michelle V. Francis

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Medical Evidence In Cases Of Intrauterine Drug And Alcohol Exposure , Judith Larsen, Robert M. Horowitz, Ira J. Chasnoff

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Admissibility Of Dna Genetic Profiling Evidence In Criminal Proceedings: The Case For Caution, Lori L. Swafford

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

State V. Makor Rishon Hameuhad (Hatzofe) Ltd., Elyakim Rubinstein, Isaac Amit, Uzi Vogelman

Translated Opinions

Facts:  A violent demonstration took place at the Ephraim District Brigade Headquarters on the night of 12/13 December 2011. A photographer, who had been invited by one of the participants, was present taking photographs. The police sought an order, pursuant to section 43 of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, requiring the photographer and her newspaper to produce the photographs. The photographer and newspaper refused, arguing that the photographs would provide information that could identify the photographer’s source, and were thus protected by the journalist’s privilege. The magistrate court applied the Citrin test and rejected the privilege claim. The district court distinguished …

Clicking Away Confidentiality: Workplace Waiver Of Attorney-Client Privilege, Adam C. Losey

Florida Law Review

In workplace waiver cases, a schism is quietly developing. Some courts are discreetly (and perhaps inadvertently) abandoning the traditionally accepted narrow interpretation of attorney-client privilege in favor of a broad protective approach on public policy grounds. Others continue to adhere to traditional doctrine. A clash between these two schools of thought may be inevitable. The universal application of a rebuttable presumption that an employee has waived attorney-client privilege could avert a direct collision between these two schools of thought and establish a semblance of predictability in workplace waiver cases.

Part II points out the growing and unspoken abandonment of traditional …

Adult Survivors Of Childhood Sexual Abuse And The Statute Of Limitations: The Need For Consistent Application Of The Delayed Discovery Rule, Gregory G. Gordon

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Psychotherapist And Patient In The California Supreme Court: Ground Lost And Ground Regained, Stanley Mosk

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Victim Harm, Retributivism And Capital Punishment: A Philosophy Critique Of Payne V. Tennessee , R. P. Peerenboom

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Scientific Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: A Proposal For A Dual Standard Of Admissibility In Civil And Criminal Cases , William P. Haney Iii

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.