More than 660 Citations in Journals, Treatises, and Similar Materials in WESTLAW to Works by Peter Tillers
|
|
Cal. Jury Instr.--Crim. 2.50.01 California Jury Instructions--Criminal Spring 2008 Edition The Committee On California Criminal Jury Instructions Part 2. Evidence and Guides for Its Consideration B. Evaluation of Evidence (c) Other Evidence CALJIC 2.50.01 Evidence of Other Sexual Offenses
... this instruction must be limited to those crimes. COMMENT Evidence Code § 1108. In 1A Wigmore on Evidence, § 55.1 (Tillers rev. 1983), it is stated that "whenever resort is had to a person's past conduct or acts as the basis ...
|
|
|
Cal. Jury Instr.--Crim. 2.50.02 California Jury Instructions--Criminal Spring 2008 Edition The Committee On California Criminal Jury Instructions Part 2. Evidence and Guides for Its Consideration B. Evaluation of Evidence (c) Other Evidence CALJIC 2.50.02 Evidence of Other Domestic Violence(2005 Revision)
... Evidence (4th ed. 2000) Circumstantial Evidence, § 98; Penal Code § 13700(a), (b). In 1A Wigmore on Evidence, § 55.1 (Tillers rev. 1983), it is stated that "whenever resort is had to a person's past conduct or acts as the basis ...
|
|
|
3 Patry on Copyright § 9:42 Patry on Copyright Database updated March 2008 William F. Patry Chapter 9. The Reproduction Right II. Elements of a Prima Facie Case of Infringement of the Reproduction Right § 9:42. Striking similarity--Striking similarity is illogical
... Common Sense? Cautionary Tales For Travelers Crossing Disciplinary Boundaries" in The Dynamics of Judicial Proof 55 (Marilyn MacCrimmon and Peter Tillers eds. 2002), and Allen, "Common Sense, Rationality and the Legal Process" reproduced id. at 43. [FN5] Lewis Carroll wrote at ...
...Dynamics of Judicial Proof 197, 198-199 (Marilyn MacCrimmon and Peter Tillers eds. 2002). The validity of striking similarity as an inference is, I assert, fatally undermined ab initio because of the ...
|
|
|
3 Patry on Copyright § 9:85 Patry on Copyright Database updated March 2008 William F. Patry Chapter 9. The Reproduction Right II. Elements of a Prima Facie Case of Infringement of the Reproduction Right § 9:85. What cognitive scientists can teach us about similarity
... Application to Legal Reasoning: A Comment to Professor Zadeb," in The Dynamics of Judicial Proof 119 (Marilyn MacCrimmon and Peter Tillers, eds. 2002). Cf. Shapira, Fuzzy Logic and Its Application to Legal Reasoning: A Reply to Professor Zadeh, id. at 119. ...
|
|
|
6 Patry on Copyright § 22:55 Patry on Copyright Database updated March 2008 William F. Patry Chapter 22. Remedies II. Preliminary Injunctions D. Evaluation of the Four Factors § 22:55. Presumption of irreparable harm and its disastrous impact on decision making--Algebraic models: American Hospital Supply Corp. v. Hospital Products Ltd.
... Swygert overemphasized the importance of quantification in Judge Posner's formula and in mathematical attempts to deal with uncertainty. Professor Peter Tillers has effectively debunked such mistakes in discussing similar efforts to apply probability theories in the law of evidence: An emphasis ...
... Eyes, 17 J. Contemp. Health L. & Policy xxxi (Winter 2000), quoting Lawson Prods., 782 F.2d at 1433-1434. [FN28] Peter Tillers, Probability and Inference in the Law of Evidence: Introduction, 66 B.U.L. Rev. 381, 384-385 (1986). [FN29] Sheldon S. Chang, On ...
|
|
|
94 Va. L. Rev. 79 Virginia Law Review March, 2008 Article OVERCOMING PROCEDURAL BOUNDARIES Issachar Rosen-Zvi [FNa1] Talia Fisher [FNaa1]
... 90 Colum. L. Rev. 1716 (1990) (arguing that jury instructions defining reasonable doubt should always be given). But see Peter Tillers & Jonathan Gottfried, United States v. Copeland: 369 F. Supp. 2d 275 (E.D.N.Y. 2005): A Collateral Attack on the Legal Maxim .... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 Neb. Prac., Mangrum Neb. Evid. Section 27-401 (2008 ed.) Nebraska Practice Series TM Mangrum On Nebraska Evidence Current through the 2008 Update R. Collin Mangrum [FNa0] Article IV. Nebraska's Evidentiary Rules on Relevancy Section 27-401. Relevant Evidence, Defined
... 185, 188, 422 N.W.2d 53, 55 (1988) (citing 1 A.J. WIGMORE, EVIDENCE IN TRIALS AT COMMON LAW § 37.4 (P. Tillers rev. 1983)); State v. Ryan, 226 Neb. 59, 409 N.W.2d 579 (1987)). [FN13] State v. Miner, 265 Neb. 778, 786, ...
|
|
|
Ga. Rules Of Evidence § 6.1 (2d ed.) Georgia Rules Of Evidence Current through 2007-2008 Pocket Part Paul S. Milich[FNa0] Part 3. Relevancy Chapter 6. General Concepts of Relevancy § 6.1. Relevance--In general
... Inc. v. Brackett, 106 Ga.App. 862, 873, 128 S.E.2d 642, 650 (1962). See also, 1A Wigmore on Evidence, § 24 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN17] See e.g., White v. State, 163 Ga.App. 179, 292 S.E.2d 875 (1982). [FN18] See § 7.1, below. ...
|
|
|
Ga. Rules Of Evidence § 11.1 (2d ed.) Georgia Rules Of Evidence Current through 2007-2008 Pocket Part Paul S. Milich[FNa0] Part 3. Relevancy Chapter 11. Character Evidence § 11.1. Character evidence--In general
...[FN2] Grannemann v. Salley, 95 Ga.App. 778, 780, 99 S.E.2d 338, 340 (1957). [FN3] 1A Wigmore on Evidence, § 58.2 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN4] 1A Wigmore on Evidence, § 58.2 (Tillers rev. 1983); see also, 9 Wigmore on Evidence, § 2483 ...
...[FN8] See generally, 1A Wigmore on Evidence, §§ 53-57, § 194 (Tillers rev. 1983); Michelson v. United States, 335 U.S. 469, 475-76, 69 S.Ct. 213, 218- 19, 93 L.Ed. 168 (1948) ("The ...
|
|
|
13B Ind. Prac., Courtroom Handbook On Ind. Evid. R 406 (2008 ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Courtroom Handbook On Indiana Evidence Current through the 2008 Edition Robert L. Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 406. Habit; routine practice
... to an alleged transaction as proof of the nature of the transaction at issue. 1A WIGMORE § 94, at 1631-1632 (Tillers rev. 1983); 2 WEINSTEIN § 406.03[5] at 406-10 to 406- 10.1 (2d ed. 2006). Some courts hold that one party's ...
|
|
|
14B Mass. Prac., Summary Of Basic Law § 10.66 (3d ed.) Massachusetts Practice Series TM Summary of Basic Law Current through the 2007 BV and 2008 PP Howard J. Alperin[FNa2], Lawrence D. Shubow[FNa3], Pocket Part By Howard J. Alperin Chapter 10. Evidence E. Relevancy (3) Other Matters § 10.66. Habit and customary practice
... Wright and Graham, Federal Practice and Procedure: Evidence (West Group, 1980), § 5277, p. 82. [FN8] See 1A Wigmore, Evidence, Tillers Revision (Little, Brown and Co., 1983), § 93, n. 1, listing the states with rules patterned on Fed.R.Evid. 406. [FN9] ...
...[FN10] 1A Wigmore, Evidence, Tillers Revision (Little, Brown and Co., 1983), § 92. [FN11] Supreme Judicial Court, Announcement Concerning the Proposed Massachusetts Rules of Evidence, ...
|
|
|
5 Wash. Prac., Evidence Law and Practice § 101.10 (5th ed.) Washington Practice Series TM Evidence Law and Practice Current Through the 2008 Update Karl B. Tegland[FNa0] Chapter 1. General Provisions Rule 101. Scope Author's Commentary § 101.10 Law review articles and other commentary on evidence generally
... Evidence, 74 Iowa L.J. 413-466 (1989). Handler, The Judicial Pursuit of Knowledge: Truth and/or Justice, 41 Rutgers L.Rev. 1-26 (1988). Tillers & Schum, Charting New Territory in Judicial Proof: Beyond Wigmore, 9 Cardozo L.Rev. 907-966 (1988). Oakley & Coon, The Federal Rules ...
... and Thomas Dillickrath, 55 U. Miami L. Rev. 527- 1125 (2001). Symposium: Artificial Intelligence and Judicial Proof. Introduction by Peter Tillers; articles by John A. Barnden, Donald M. Peterson, Zdzislaw Pawlak, Ronald J. Allen, Marilyn MacCrimmon, David A. Schum, Paolo Garbolino, ...
... Would Not Make For Good Philosophy of Evidence, 1997 B.Y.U. L. Rev. 803-819. Symposium on Evidence Scholarship. Introduction by Peter Tillers; articles by Ariel Porat, Alex Stein, Richard D. Friedman, Johan Bring, Colin Aitken, Christian Borgelt and Rudolf Kruse, 18 Cardozo ...
|
|
|
5 Wash. Prac., Evidence Law and Practice § 104.13 (5th ed.) Washington Practice Series TM Evidence Law and Practice Current Through the 2008 Update Karl B. Tegland[FNa0] Chapter 1. General Provisions Rule 104. Preliminary Questions Author's Commentary § 104.13 Law review articles and other commentary on Rule 104
... Mich. L. Rev. 419-465 (1995). Friedman, Richard D., Conditional Probative Value: Neoclassicism Without Myth, 93 Mich. L. Rev. 439-477 (1994). Tillers, Peter, Response: Exaggerated and Misleading Reports of the Death of Conditional Relevance, 93 Mich. L. Rev. 478-484 (1994). Note, Preliminary ...
|
|
|
5 Wash. Prac., Evidence Law and Practice § 404.37 (5th ed.) Washington Practice Series TM Evidence Law and Practice Current Through the 2008 Update Karl B. Tegland[FNa0] Chapter 4. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Author's Commentary Rule 404(b) Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts § 404.37 Law review articles and other commentary on Rule 404
... 763-811. Alprin, Katherine J., Character Evidence in the Quasi-Criminal Trial: An Argument For Admissibility, 73 Tul. L. Rev. 2073-2093 (1999). Tillers, Peter, What is Wrong With Character Evidence?, 49 Hastings L.J. 781-834 (1998). Mendez, Miguel A., Character Evidence Reconsidered: "People Do ...
|
|
|
5B Wash. Prac., Evidence Law and Practice § 801.56 (5th ed.) Washington Practice Series TM Evidence Law and Practice Current Through the 2008 Update Karl B. Tegland[FNa0] Chapter 8. Hearsay Rule 801. Hearsay Definitions Author's Commentary C. Admissions by Party-Opponent § 801.56 Constitutional restrictions on the use of admissions and confessions; related restrictions
... 183 (illegally obtained evidence for impeachment) (two-volume 4th ed.). [FN8] Restrictions do not apply 3 Wigmore on Evidence § 815 (Tillers rev. 1983). © 2008 Thomson/West 5B WAPRAC § 801.56 ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36 Sw. U. L. Rev. 853 Southwestern University Law Review 2008 Articles AN ESSAY ON: OF JUDGES AND JURIES [FN1] REVISITED IN THE CONTEXT OF CERTAIN PRELIMINARY FACT QUESTIONS DETERMINING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE UNDER FEDERAL AND CALIFORNIA RULES OF EVIDENCE Norman M. Garland [FNa1]
... L. Rev. 871 (1992), Richard D. Friedman, Conditional Probative Value: Neoclassicism Without Myth, 93 Mich. L. Rev. 439 (1994); Peter Tillers, Exaggerated and Misleading Reports of the Death of Conditional Relevance, 93 Mich. L. Rev. 478 (1994); and Craig R. Callen, ...
|
|
|
36 Sw. U. L. Rev. 879 Southwestern University Law Review 2008 Articles ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE TO PROVE UNDISPUTED FACTS: A COMPARISON OF THE CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE CODE § 210 AND FEDERAL RULE OF EVIDENCE 401 Mark Cammack [FNa1]
... lacking legal relevancy"); see also 1A John H. Wigmore, Evidence in Trials at Common Law § 28, at 969 (Peter Tillers rev., Little Brown and Co. 1983) (1904) (introducing for the first time the term "legally relevant"). [FN22]. George F. James, ...
|
|
|
1 Moy's Walker on Patents § 4:13 (4th ed.) Moy's Walker on Patents Database updated December 2007 R. Carl Moy Part II. Patentability and Validity Chapter 4. Patent Claims II. Claim Theory A. Central vs. Peripheral Claiming § 4:13. The mechanics of claim interpretation--The identity of the decision maker--Law vs. fact--Law and fact generally
... generally, e.g., Weiner, The Civil Jury Trial, 54 Cal. L. Rev. 1867, 1868-71; 1 Wigmore on Evidence § 1 n.2 (Tillers ed. 1983). [FN2] E.g., 2 Restatement (Second) of Torts § 328C (1965); George C. Christie, Judicial Review of Findings of ...
|
|
|
2 Moy's Walker on Patents § 8:261 (4th ed.) Moy's Walker on Patents Database updated December 2007 R. Carl Moy Part II. Patentability and Validity Chapter 8. Lack of Anticipation IV. Timing of Event B. Paragraph 102(b)--Novelty in Relation to Filing Date of Application § 8:261. Experimental use--Law vs. fact
... The Civil Jury Trial and the Law-Fact Distinction, 54 Cal. L. Rev. 1867 (1966); 1 Wigmore on Evidence § 1 (Tillers ed. 1983). [FN5] Lough v. Brunswick Corp., 103 F.3d 1517, 1520, 1524, 41 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1385 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (declining ...
|
|
|
86 Tex. L. Rev. 347 Texas Law Review December, 2007 Book Review ON MISSHAPEN STONES AND CRIMINAL LAW'S EPISTEMOLOGY Truth, Error, and Criminal Law: An Essay in Legal Epistemology. By Larry Laudan. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Pp. 254. $75.00. Michael S. Pardo [FNa1]
... Standard of Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt: A Comment on Three Comments, 5 Law Probability & Risk 267 (2006); Peter Tillers & Jonathan Gottfried, Case Comment --United States v. Copeland, 369 F. Supp. 2d 275 (E.D.N.Y. 2005): A Collateral Attack on the ...
|
|
|
6 Law, Probability & Risk 1 Law, Probability & Risk March/December, 2007 Article INTRODUCTION: VISUALIZING EVIDENCE AND INFERENCE IN LEGAL SETTINGS Peter Tillers [FNd1]
...March/December, 2007 Article INTRODUCTION: VISUALIZING EVIDENCE AND INFERENCE IN LEGAL SETTINGS Peter Tillers [FNd1] Professor of Law, Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University, New York, USA Copyright © 2007 by Oxford University Press; ...
... Professor of Law, Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University, New York, USA Copyright © 2007 by Oxford University Press; Peter Tillers By now it is an old story: legal scholarship in the English-speaking world about the law of evidence began to ...
|
|
|
6 Law, Probability & Risk 23 Law, Probability & Risk March/December, 2007 Article THE RATIONALE FOR RATIONALE™ Tim van Gelder [FNd1]
... other parts of the argument moved aside to accommodate that line. Another aspect of this layout is worth mentioning. Peter Tillers (2005) has described the importance, in comprehending complex reasoning, of being able to focus attention on a particular part without losing ...
... of argumentation. Argumentation, 14, 447-473. SPADE, P. (1988). Lies, Language and Logic in the Late Middle Ages. London: Variorum Reprints. TILLERS, P. (2005). Picturing factual inference in legal settings. In B. Schünemann & M.-T. Tinnefeld & R. Wittman (Eds.), Gerechtigkeitwissenschaft: Kolloquium ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 Law, Probability & Risk 145 Law, Probability & Risk March/December, 2007 Article SENSE-MAKING SOFTWARE FOR CRIME INVESTIGATION: HOW TO COMBINE STORIES AND ARGUMENTS? Floris Bex Susan van den Braak, Herre van Oostendorp Henry Prakken [FNd1] Bart Verheij Gerard Vreeswijk
... a case in terms of arguments on the relevance of evidence to the various hypotheses using common knowledge (Schum and Tillers, 1991). With such a programme, the user could visualize his reasoning in various ways (graphs, tables, forms) and explore its ...
... of building arguments from the available evidence to the hypotheses by applying commonsense generalizations (Anderson and Twining, 1991; Schum and Tillers, 1991). In this method, causal statements (for instance, the shooting has caused the appearance of gun powder) are often inverted ...
... generalizations has been emphasized in two recent research strands in legal theory, 'NET' (e.g. Anderson and Twining, 1991; Schum and Tillers, 1991) and 'ANT' (Wagenaar et al., 1993). Both approaches stress the importance of empirical generalizations in reasoning about evidence but ...
|
|
|
6 Law, Probability & Risk 169 Law, Probability & Risk March/December, 2007 Article ARGUMENTATION, STORIES AND GENERALIZATIONS: A COMMENT William Twining [FNd1]
... complexities of practical inferential reasoning and argumentation in legal contexts. Acknowledgements I am grateful to Terry Anderson, David Schum, Peter Tillers and participants at the Cardozo Conference in January 2007 for helpful comments and suggestions. REFERENCES ANDERSON, T., SCHUM, D. AND ...
... White Teeth (New York: Random House). STONE, JULIUS (1959) 'The Ratio of the Ratio Decidendi', 22 Modern L. Rev. 597. TILLERS, PETER (1983) 'Modern Theories of Relevancy', reprinted from 1A Wigmore Treatise (Tillers rev. 1983), s. 37 (Boston: Little, Brown). TILLERS, ...
... Brown). TILLERS, PETER AND DAVID SCHUM (1988) 'Charting New Territory in Judicial Proof: Beyond Wigmore', 9 Cardozo L. Rev. 907. TILLERS, PETER AND DAVID SCHUM (1991) 'A Theory of Preliminary Fact Investigation', 24 U. C. Davis L. Rev. 931. TWINING, WILLIAM ...
|
|
|
6 Law, Probability & Risk 187 Law, Probability & Risk March/December, 2007 Article ARGUMENTATION SUPPORT SOFTWARE: BOXES-AND-ARROWS AND BEYOND Bart Verheij [FNd1]
... the Argue! system that I developed before the ArguMed system allows cycles. [FN3]. The conference was excellently organized by Peter Tillers, Henry Prakken, Thomas D. Cobb and Jonathan Gottfried. Further details are available at http://tillers.net/conference.html (page visited on 8 February 2007). ...
|
|
|
6 Law, Probability & Risk 209 Law, Probability & Risk March/December, 2007 Article CAN YOU HAVE TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING? A COMMENT ON BART VERHEIJ'S LEGAL ARGUMENTATION SUPPORT SOFTWARE Burkhard Schafer [FNd1]
... teach judges. More than 50 years later little has changed. With few exceptions such as the courses by Twining and Tillers, legal education still focuses on issues of legal interpretation in 'landmark' cases decided by the higher courts, even though in ...
... may be illuminating at this point to compare Verheij's approach with the use of diagram charts by the 'new Wigmoreans' (Tillers and Schum, 1988; Anderson et al., 2005). They move some of this issue away from the diagrams themselves to the ...
... K. & OBERLANDER, J. (1995), A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: logic and implementation, Cognitive Science 19, 97-140. TILLERS, P. & SCHUM, D. (1988), Charting new territory in judicial proof: beyond wigmore, Cardozo Law Review 9, 907-966. TWINING, W. ...
|
|
|
6 Law, Probability & Risk 225 Law, Probability & Risk March/December, 2007 Article GRAPHICAL MANIPULATION OF EVIDENCE IN STRUCTURED ARGUMENTS John D. Lowrance [FNd1]
... (3) surrender (4) in writing of (5) a legal claim or potential legal claim (6) in exchange for legal consideration (Tillers, 2002). Here the claim/defense could be captured as the root node in a unidimensional template, directly supported by nodes representing ...
... paper, providing me with some perspective on potential legal applications of these techniques. Finally, I want to thank Prof. Peter Tillers who first engaged me regarding the potential applicability of these techniques to legal reasoning and for his assistance and guidance ...
... 2005 Angler: Collaboratively Expanding Your Cognitive Horizon. Proceeding of the International Conference on Intelligence Analysis, The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Virginia. TILLERS, P. (2002) Notes on Legal Marshalling Fact Investigation, Cardozo Law School, New York, http://tillers.net/fi-course/legalmarshal.html. TOUMLIN, S. 1958 The Uses of ...
|
|
|
6 Law, Probability & Risk 319 Law, Probability & Risk March/December, 2007 Article COMMENT ON THE CARDOZO CONFERENCE ON GRAPHIC AND VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF EVIDENCE AND INFERENCE IN LEGAL SETTINGS Ron Loui [FNd1]
... address these questions here. They are such important questions that the conference could not have avoided them, especially after Peter Tillers endeavoured to throw together formalists and informalists, theoretical and practical people, to decide the fate of the evidence visualization tools ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
82 Tul. L. Rev. 119 Tulane Law Review November, 2007 Article TESTIMONY Michael S. Pardo [FNa1]
... extrajudicial utterance as an assertion to evidence the fact asserted. Such a use would be testimonial ...." (citation omitted)); Peter Tillers & David Schum, Hearsay Logic, 76 Minn. L. Rev. 813, 815 (1992) ( "[L]ike Wigmore, we believe that a theory of ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 Wharton's Criminal Evidence § 4:18 (15th ed.) Wharton's Criminal Evidence Database updated November 2007 Barbara E. Bergman and Nancy Hollander Part One. Analysis Chapter 4. Relevance III. CHARACTER EVIDENCE § 4:18. Generally
... L. Rev. 529, 583 n.3 (1994). [FN39] IA Wigmore, Evidence in Trials at Common Law, § 54.1, at 1150-51 (Peter Tillers revised ed., 1983). [FN40] IA Wigmore, Evidence in Trials at Common Law, § 58.2, at 1215 (Peter Tillers revised ed., ...
|
|
|
1 Wharton's Criminal Evidence § 4:42 (15th ed.) Wharton's Criminal Evidence Database updated November 2007 Barbara E. Bergman and Nancy Hollander Part One. Analysis Chapter 4. Relevance V. SPECIAL RELEVANCY RULES § 4:42. Sexual assault/child molestation: evidence of similar crimes [FN71]
... violate due process or equal protection). [FN76] IA Wigmore, Evidence at Trials at Common Law § 58.2 at 1213 (Peter Tillers revised ed., 1983). [FN77] Writing before the rules were enacted, Professor Imwinkelried said that the "enactment of Rule 413 would ...
|
|
|
31 Colum. J.L. & Arts 1 Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts Fall 2007 POETIC (IN)JUSTICE? RAP MUSIC LYRICS AS ART, LIFE, AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE Andrea L. Dennis [FNa1]
... with Unconscious Racism, 39 Stan. L. Rev. 317 (1987); (2) whether group to individual evidentiary character inferences are appropriate, see Tillers on Evidence and Inference, http://tillerstillers.blogspot.com (Dec. 12, 2006, 10:28 EST) (questioning "whether group-to-individual inferences are less odious as well as ...
|
|
|
5 N.Y.Prac., Evidence in New York State and Federal Courts § 8:94 New York Practice Series - Evidence in New York State and Federal Courts Database updated October 2007 Robert A. Barker and Vincent C. Alexander Chapter 8. Hearsay IV. Hearsay Statements Admissible If Declarant Unavailable E. Residual Hearsay Exception § 8:94. New York
... that they must be rejected as worthless if the test is unavailable. 2 J. Wigmore, Evidence § 8c, at 644 (Tillers rev.ed.1983), quoted in Ortiz, 119 Misc.2d at 574, 463 N.Y.S.2d at 715-16 (emphasis in original). [FN17] It was because the ...
|
|
|
Examination of Witnesses § 5:49 (2d. ed.) Examination of Witnesses Database updated August 2007 Kenneth M. Mogill Chapter 5. Witness Examination--General III. Direct Examination E. Character Witnesses § 5:49. Evidentiary considerations
... Ed. 2d 771, 780, 25 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1 (1988). [FN7] Fed. R. Evid. 404(a)(1). Wigmore, Evidence, § 56 (Tillers Rev Ed); McCormick, Handbook of the Law of Evidence (3d ed.) § 191. [FN8] Fed. R. Evid. 404(a)(1). ...
|
|
|
Examination of Witnesses § 5:160 (2d. ed.) Examination of Witnesses Database updated August 2007 Kenneth M. Mogill Chapter 5. Witness Examination--General VII. Objections A. In General § 5:160. Purposes of objections
...[FN12] See Fed. R. Evid. 103(a). [FN13] See Fed. R. Evid. 103(d). [FN14] Wigmore, Evidence, § 18 (Tillers Rev Ed); Wright, Miller & Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure, Evidence § 5036; Lilly, An Introduction to the Law of ...
|
|
|
Examination of Witnesses § 5:161 (2d. ed.) Examination of Witnesses Database updated August 2007 Kenneth M. Mogill Chapter 5. Witness Examination--General VII. Objections A. In General § 5:161. Timeliness of objections
...[FN4] Fed. R. Evid. 103(a)(1). See also Cal. Evid. Code § 353. [FN5] Wigmore, Evidence, § 18 (Tillers Rev Ed); McCormick, Handbook of the Law of Evidence (3d ed.) § 52. Nehring v. Smith, 243 Iowa 225, 49 ...
...[FN7] Wigmore, Evidence, § 18 (Tillers Rev Ed); McCormick, Handbook of the Law of Evidence (3d ed.) § 52. [FN8] See § 8:30. © 2006 Thomson/West ...
|
|
|
Examination of Witnesses § 5:162 (2d. ed.) Examination of Witnesses Database updated August 2007 Kenneth M. Mogill Chapter 5. Witness Examination--General VII. Objections A. In General § 5:162. Object of objections; testimony, questions, exhibits
... feasibility of marking the area. Id. at 1064. [FN8] See § 7:8. Fed. R. Evid. 105. Wigmore, Evidence, § 13 (Tillers Rev Ed); McCormick, Handbook of the Law of Evidence (3d ed.) § 59. [FN9] Fed. R. Evid. 901(a). ...
|
|
|
5 Maryland Evidence, § 104:2 Maryland Evidence, State & Federal Database updated August 2007 Lynn McLain Chapter 1. General Provisions 104. Division of Labor between Judge and Jury § 104:2. Preliminary facts
... 77 (1989); Laughlin, Preliminary Questions of Fact: A New Theory, 31 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 285 (1974). But see Tillers, Exaggerated and Misleading Reports of The Death of Conditional Relevance, 93 Mich. L. Rev. 478 (1994). [FN6] Ball, The Myth ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53 Loy. L. Rev. 217 Loyola Law Review Summer 2007 Comments "FOR IT MUST SEEM THEIR GUILT": DILUTING REASONABLE DOUBT BY REJECTING THE REASONABLE HYPOTHESIS OF INNOCENCE STANDARD Julie Schmidt Chauvin
... should be attributed to each); 1A John Henry Wigmore, Evidence in Trials at Common Law § 24, at 944 (Peter Tillers rev. 1983) (noting that with direct evidence, "the basis of inference is the assertion of a human being as to ...
|
|
|
53 Wayne L. Rev. 295 Wayne Law Review Spring, 2007 Article EVIDENCE M. Bryan Schneider [FNd1]
... Mich. R. Evid. 404(b)(2). [FN247]. 1A JOHN H. WIGMORE, EVIDENCE IN TRIALS AT COMMON LAW § 58.2, at 1212 (Peter Tillers ed., rev. 1983); see also, Michelson v. United States, 335 U.S. 469, 475-76 (1948). [FN248]. See People v. Zackowitz, 172 ...
|
|
|
75 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 461 George Washington Law Review April, 2007 Article CUSTOMIZED LITIGATION: THE CASE FOR MAKING CIVIL PROCEDURE NEGOTIABLE Michael L. Moffitt [FNa1]
... the concept of justice. See, e.g., 1 John Henry Wigmore, Evidence in Trials at Common Law § 7a n.2 (Peter Tillers ed., 1983) ("[W]e have an old-fashioned belief that the forms of justice should not be bartered and sold and since, ...
|
|
|
12 Berkeley J. Crim. L. 1 Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law Spring 2007 Article CONFESSIONS AND HARMLESS ERROR: A NEW ARGUMENT FOR THE OLD APPROACH Alan Hirsch [FNd1]
... point with respect to character evidence, which is often excluded on the ground that jurors cannot evaluate it properly. Peter Tillers, What Is Wrong with Character Evidence?, 49 Hastings L.J. 781, 790 (1998) ("There is no good reason to believe that ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 Rich. J.L. & Tech. 10 Richmond Journal of Law and Technology Spring, 2007 Articles INFORMATION INFLATION: CAN THE LEGAL SYSTEM ADAPT? George L. Paul [FNa1] Jason R. Baron [FNaa1]
... What is Bayesianism?, in PROBABILITY AND INFERENCE IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE: THE USES AND LIMITS OF BAYESIANISM 1 (Peter Tillers & Eric D. Green eds., 1988); Michael O. Finkelstein & William B. Fairley, A Bayesian Approach to Identification Evidence, 83 HARV. ...
... Legal System's Failure to Appreciate Statistical Evidence, in STATISTICAL SCIENCE IN THE COURTROOM, 405-13 (Joseph L. Gastwirth ed., 2000); Peter Tillers, Introduction: Three Contributions to Three Important Problems in Evidence Scholarship, 18 CARDOZO L. REV. 1875, 1879-89 (1997). [FN122]. See generally ...
|
|
|
38 Rutgers L.J. 897 Rutgers Law Journal Spring, 2007 Note DISTORTING THE LIMITS OF FRE 406: A TOUGH HABIT TO BREAK Robert P. Duffield II [FNa1]
... are considered "crusty"); IA JOHN HENRY WIGMORE, EVIDENCE IN TRIALS AT COMMON LAW § 93, at 1620-22 (rev. by Peter Tillers, 1983) (observing that preconditions for admissibility, such as the "no-eyewitness" limitation have generally been abandoned); 23 CHARLES ALAN WRIGHT & ...
|
|
|
41 New Eng. L. Rev. 435 New England Law Review Spring 2007 Symposium CSI AND ITS EFFECTS: MEDIA, JURIES, AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF Simon A. Cole [FNa1] Rachel Dioso-Villa [FNaa1]
... 159, at 310; see also Solan, supra note 159, at 126; Stoffelmayr & Diamond, supra note 159, at 779; Peter Tillers & Jonathan Gottfried, Case Comment --United States v. Copeland, 369 F. Supp. 2d 275 (E.D.N.Y. 2005): A Collateral Attack on the ...
... worry that it will be confused with "morality." Victor v. Nebraska, 511 U.S. 1, 37 (1994) (Blackmun, J., dissenting). [FN171]. Tillers & Gottfried, supra note 164, at 143. ...
|
|
|
43 No. 1 Crim. Law Bulletin 4 Criminal Law Bulletin January-February 2007 Evidence and Trial Advocacy: Advanced Workshop Michael H. Graham
... crime and is therefore likely to have committed the offense for which he stands trial. 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 58.2 (Tillers rev.1983). As Dean Wigmore points out, the evidence "is objectionable not because it has no appreciable probative value but because ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47 Jurimetrics J. 193 Jurimetrics Journal Winter, 2007 Article A DEFAULT-LOGIC PARADIGM FOR LEGAL FACT-FINDING Vern R. Walker [FNa1]
... in torts cases, reference group A must adequately represent the particular plaintiff before a direct inference is warranted). Cf. Peter Tillers, If Wishes Were Horses: Discursive Comments on Attempts to Prevent Individuals from Being Unfairly Burdened by Their Reference Classes, 4 ...
|
|
|
36 J. Legal Stud. 107 Journal of Legal Studies January, 2007 THE PROBLEMATIC VALUE OF MATHEMATICAL MODELS OF EVIDENCE Ronald J. Allen, Michael S. Pardo [FNa1]
... probability theory to explain aspects of trials (see, for example, Kaplan 1968; Finkelstein and Fairley 1970; Lempert 1977; Friedman 1987; Tillers and Schum 1992). This literature was both insightful and frustrating. It shed much light on the legal system by bringing ...
... 859 [E.D.N.Y. 1992]). [FN33] The debate among scholars has explicitly focused on the reference-class problem (Colyvan, Regan, and Ferson 2001; Tillers 2005). We first discuss the case and the commentary and then offer an interpretation and partial defense of the Second ...
... specific-evidence requirement to mean evidence of "Shonubi's previous behavior" such as "previous convictions, financial dealings and so on." In response, Tillers (2005) also explicitly focuses on the reference-class issue, but he criticizes both the Second Circuit and Colyvan, Regan, and Ferson (2001) ...
|
|
|
7 Ia. Prac., Evidence § 5.103:8 (2007 ed.) Iowa Practice Series TM Evidence Current through 2007 Update James A. Adams [FNa0], Joseph P. Weeg [FNa1] Chapter 1. General Provisions 5.103. Rulings on Evidence A. Rulings Admitting Evidence § 5.103:8 Related waiver doctrines
... purpose was to contradict victim's testimony rather than to explain it). [FN8] See generally, e.g., 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 15 (Tillers Rev.1983); 1 McCormick on Evidence § 57 (4th ed. 1992). [FN9] See State v. Judkins, 242 N.W.2d 266, 267 (Iowa ...
|
|
|
1 Tex. Prac., Texas Rules Of Evidence § 103.1 (3d ed.) Texas Practice Series TM Guide To The Texas Rules Of Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Steven Goode[FNa0], Olin Guy Wellborn III[FNa1], M. Michael Sharlot [FNa2] Chapter 1. Article I: General Provisions Rule 103. Rulings On Evidence Commentary § 103.1 Rule 103: Rulings on evidence; Rule 103(a): Effect of erroneous ruling
... (discussing the closely related concepts "opening the door," "curative admissibility," and "fighting fire with fire"); 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 15 (Tillers rev. 1983) (collecting numerous cases from many jurisdictions). [FN15] See Park, Leonard & Goldberg, supra note 14; McCormick, Evidence § ...
...[FN19] State v. Chavers, 454 S.W.2d 395, 398 (Tex.1970). Accord, 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 18, at 836-38 (Tillers rev. 1983) ("[A]n opponent ordinarily waives his own objection if he makes subsequent use of evidence similar to that which ...
|
|
|
1 Tex. Prac., Texas Rules Of Evidence § 401.1 (3d ed.) Texas Practice Series TM Guide To The Texas Rules Of Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Steven Goode[FNa0], Olin Guy Wellborn III[FNa1], M. Michael Sharlot [FNa2] Chapter 4. Article IV: Relevancy And Its Limits Rule 401. Definition Of "Relevant Evidence" Commentary § 401.1 Definition of "relevant evidence": Introduction
... on Evidence, 264-65 (1898). See also McCormick, Evidence § 184 (5th ed. 1992); 1 Wigmore, Evidence §§ 9-10, at 655-74 (Tillers rev.1983). [FN3] As originally promulgated, Civil Rule 401 read: Rule 401. Test of Relevancy (a) "Materiality" inquires whether there is ...
|
|
|
1 Tex. Prac., Texas Rules Of Evidence § 403.1 (3d ed.) Texas Practice Series TM Guide To The Texas Rules Of Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Steven Goode[FNa0], Olin Guy Wellborn III[FNa1], M. Michael Sharlot [FNa2] Chapter 4. Article IV: Relevancy And Its Limits Rule 403. Exclusion Of Relevant Evidence On Special Grounds Commentary § 403.1 Introduction: The balancing test; trial court's discretion; the omission of surprise as a countervailing factor
...[FN8] See McCormick, Evidence § 185 (5th ed. 1999); 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 29a, at 978-80 & note 1 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN9] Ford Motor Co. v. Pool, 688 S.W.2d 879, 882 (Tex.App.--Texarkana, 1985) ("The rule represents a codification of ...
|
|
|
1 Tex. Prac., Texas Rules Of Evidence § 404.2 (3d ed.) Texas Practice Series TM Guide To The Texas Rules Of Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Steven Goode[FNa0], Olin Guy Wellborn III[FNa1], M. Michael Sharlot [FNa2] Chapter 4. Article IV: Relevancy And Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible To Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Commentary § 404.2 Rule 404(a): Meaning of "character"; general rule against using character evidence to prove conforming conduct; circumstantial use of character evidence; character in issue
... Federal Rules 404 & 405; 2 Weinstein's Evidence ¶; 404[01]. [FN9] See, e.g., 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 52, at 1148 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN10] See Landa v. Obert, 5 Tex.Civ.App. 620, 25 S.W. 342, 344 (1893, writ ref'd). [FN10.05] The British ...
...[FN12] See, e.g., McCormick, Evidence § 188 (5th ed. 1999) and 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 54.1, at 1150 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN13] E.g., Brewington v. State, 802 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex.Crim.App.1991) (reversible error to permit jury to hear that ...
|
|
|
1 Tex. Prac., Texas Rules Of Evidence § 404.4 (3d ed.) Texas Practice Series TM Guide To The Texas Rules Of Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Steven Goode[FNa0], Olin Guy Wellborn III[FNa1], M. Michael Sharlot [FNa2] Chapter 4. Article IV: Relevancy And Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible To Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Commentary § 404.4 Rule 404(a)(2): Exception for character of victim: the criminal provision; the civil provision
... absence of evidence that victim made overt aggressive acts on this occasion). [FN12] 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 63, at 1151 (Tillers rev.1983). [FN12.05] Mai v. State, 189 S.W.3d 316, 321 (Tex.App.--Fort Worth 2006). Accord Reyna v. State, 99 S.W.3d 344 (Tex.App.--Fort ...
|
|
|
1 Tex. Prac., Texas Rules Of Evidence § 405.1 (3d ed.) Texas Practice Series TM Guide To The Texas Rules Of Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Steven Goode[FNa0], Olin Guy Wellborn III[FNa1], M. Michael Sharlot [FNa2] Chapter 4. Article IV: Relevancy And Its Limits Rule 405. Methods Of Proving Character Commentary § 405.1 Rule 405: Methods of proving character: Introduction
... 603, 635-49 (2004). [FN7] See, e.g., McCormick, Evidence § 186 (5th ed. 1999); 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 52, at 1148 (Tillers rev. 1983); 22 Wright & Graham, Federal Practice and Procedure § 5262, at 565 (1978). [FN8] See § 405.3 infra. ...
|
|
|
1 Tex. Prac., Texas Rules Of Evidence § 405.2.1 (3d ed.) Texas Practice Series TM Guide To The Texas Rules Of Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Steven Goode[FNa0], Olin Guy Wellborn III[FNa1], M. Michael Sharlot [FNa2] Chapter 4. Article IV: Relevancy And Its Limits Rule 405. Methods Of Proving Character Commentary § 405.2.1 Rule 405(a): Introduction
... (5th ed. 1999). "The actual moral or psychical disposition or sum of traits." 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 52, at 1148 (Tillers rev. 1983). See Nolte v. State, 854 S.W.2d 304, 308-09 (Tex.App.--Austin 1993, pet. ref'd) (citing this Treatise in the course ...
|
|
|
1 Tex. Prac., Texas Rules Of Evidence § 405.3 (3d ed.) Texas Practice Series TM Guide To The Texas Rules Of Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Steven Goode[FNa0], Olin Guy Wellborn III[FNa1], M. Michael Sharlot [FNa2] Chapter 4. Article IV: Relevancy And Its Limits Rule 405. Methods Of Proving Character Commentary § 405.3 Rule 405(b): Specific instances of conduct
... See Advisory Committee's Note to Federal Rule 404(a); McCormick, Evidence § 187 (5th ed. 1999); 1A Wigmore, Evidence §§ 69-79 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN3] 2 Louisell & Mueller, Federal Evidence § 150, at 334 (rev. 1985). But cf. the discussion of ...
...[FN7] 1A Wigmore, Evidence §§ 69-79 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN8] See, e.g., Brook v. Morriss, Morriss & Boatwright, 212 S.W.2d 257, 259 (Tex.Civ.App.--Austin 1948, no writ) (evidence ...
|
|
|
1 Tex. Prac., Texas Rules Of Evidence § 406.1 (3d ed.) Texas Practice Series TM Guide To The Texas Rules Of Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Steven Goode[FNa0], Olin Guy Wellborn III[FNa1], M. Michael Sharlot [FNa2] Chapter 4. Article IV: Relevancy And Its Limits Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice Commentary § 406.1 Habit and routine practice: Introduction
...[FN3] See McCormick, Evidence § 195 (5th ed. 1999); 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 93 and cases cited at n. 1 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN4] E.g., Cereste v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Ry. Co., 231 F.2d 50, 53-54 (2d Cir.1956), ...
... 848, 100 L.Ed. 1475 (1956). See McCormick, Evidence § 195 (5th ed. 1999); 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 92, at 1607 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN5] "[T]he uniformity of one's response to habit is far greater than the consistency with which one's conduct ...
|
|
|
1 Tex. Prac., Texas Rules Of Evidence § 406.2 (3d ed.) Texas Practice Series TM Guide To The Texas Rules Of Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Steven Goode[FNa0], Olin Guy Wellborn III[FNa1], M. Michael Sharlot [FNa2] Chapter 4. Article IV: Relevancy And Its Limits Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice Commentary § 406.2 Habit and business routine defined; character distinguished
... from extortion is not a semi-automatic act and does not constitute habit."). [FN7] But see 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 93 (Tillers rev. 1983) (rejecting the distinction between habit and character drawn by McCormick and others). [FN8] 22 Wright and Graham, Federal ...
|
|
|
1 Tex. Prac., Texas Rules Of Evidence § 412.1 (3d ed.) Texas Practice Series TM Guide To The Texas Rules Of Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Steven Goode[FNa0], Olin Guy Wellborn III[FNa1], M. Michael Sharlot [FNa2] Chapter 4. Article IV: Relevancy And Its Limits Rule 412. Evidence Of Previous Sexual Conduct In Criminal Cases Commentary § 412.1 Rule 412: Evidence of previous sexual conduct: History and policy
...[FN2] See § 404.4 supra. [FN3] See 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 62, at 1260-61 and n. 4 (Tillers rev. 1983). Wigmore advocated that evidence of the complainant's chastity should also be admissible as bearing on her credibility. 3A ...
... generally Annot., 94 A.L.R.3d 257. [FN5] McCormick, Evidence § 193 (5th ed. 1999); 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 62, at 1263 (Tillers rev. 1983) (quoting the third edition of that work). [FN6] See, e.g., Tyler v. State, 145 Tex.Crim. 315, 167 S.W.2d ...
|
|
|
1 Winning Evidence Arguments § 401:1 Winning Evidence Arguments Current through the 2007 Update Michael H. Graham[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 401. Definition of "Relevant Evidence" Commentary § 401:1 Relevant evidence: materiality and "fact of consequence"
... Neb. 185, 422 N.W.2d 53 (1988), citing 1A John H. Wigmore, Evidence in Trials at Common Law § 37.4 (Peter Tillers rev. 1983)."); People v. Bolden, 84 Cal.Rptr.2d 111, 116 (Cal.App.3 Dist.1999) ("Evidence, whether direct or indirect, is relevant whenever ' ...
|
|
|
1 Winning Evidence Arguments § 404:4 Winning Evidence Arguments Current through the 2007 Update Michael H. Graham[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Commentary § 404:4 Rule 404(a)(2): Character evidence of the alleged victim
... evidence that the victim was the first aggressor." 1 John H. Wigmore, Evidence § 63, at 1370 n. 5 (Peter Tillers rev.1983). The State invites this Court to adopt the Wigmore approach and uphold the trial court's ruling in this case ...
|
|
|
1 Winning Evidence Arguments § 404:5 Winning Evidence Arguments Current through the 2007 Update Michael H. Graham[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Commentary § 404:5 Rule 404(b): Other crimes, wrongs or acts
... on Evidence § 190, at 803 (4th ed. 1992) (Practitioner Treatise Series); 1A John H. Wigmore, Evidence § 62.2 (Peter Tillers rev. ed. 1983); Gezzi v. State, 780 P.2d 972, 974 n. 4 (Wyo.1989)."). Contra State v. Castaneda, 621 N.W.2d 435, ...
... v. Rodriguez, 42 Cal.3d 730, 756-758, 230 Cal.Rptr. 667, 726 P.2d 113; 1A Wigmore, Evidence §§ 102, 106, 117, 118 [Tillers rev.1983]; Fisch, New York Evidence §§ 240, 241 [2d ed.1977]). Moreover, it is well established that the fact of a ...
... crime and is therefore likely to have committed the offense for which he stands trial. 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 58.2 (Tillers rev.1983). As Dean Wigmore points out, the evidence "is objectionable not because it has no appreciable probative value but because ...
|
|
|
1 Winning Evidence Arguments § 103:3 Winning Evidence Arguments Current through the 2007 Update Michael H. Graham[FNa0] Article I. General Provisions Rule 103. Rulings on Evidence Commentary § 103:3 Rule 103(a)(1): Error in admitting; time of objecting; motion to strike; curative instructions
... of law and, secondly, to give notice of the terms of the issue.' 1 WIGMORE ON EVIDENCE § 18, 793 (Tillers rev.1983). Wigmore describes the proper timing of an objection: The general principle governing the time of the objection is that ...
|
|
|
1 Winning Evidence Arguments § 103:4 Winning Evidence Arguments Current through the 2007 Update Michael H. Graham[FNa0] Article I. General Provisions Rule 103. Rulings on Evidence Commentary § 103:4 Error in admitting: waiver of right to object by other than failure to make; door opening
... same evidence to rebut, destroy, or explain the improperly admitted evidence. See 1 Wigmore on Evidence, § 18, at 836-38 (Tillers rev. 1983). The defendant sub judice was not attempting to use the evidence defensively. Rather, this case is analogous to ...
|
|
|
2 Winning Evidence Arguments § 807:1 Winning Evidence Arguments Current through the 2007 Update Michael H. Graham[FNa0] Article VIII. Hearsay Rule 807. Residual Exception Commentary § 807:1 Residual exception
... has passed through the hands of the postal officials at the time and place indicated." 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 151 (Tillers rev. 1983). Because the inherent trustworthiness and reliability of a postmark has been universally recognized, the concern becomes whether a ...
|
|
|
2 Subst. Crim. L. § 17.5 (2d ed.) Substantive Criminal Law Current through the 2007 Update Wayne R. LaFave[FNa0] Part Three. Offenses Against the Person Chapter 17. Rape § 17.5. Procedure and punishment
... of jurisdictions. Id. at 420. [FN42] State v. Crisp, 629 S.W.2d 475 (Mo.App.1981). [FN43] 1A Wigmore, Evidence §§ 62, 62.1 (Tillers rev.1983). [FN44] People v. Johnson, 106 Cal. 289, 39 P. 622 (1895). Compare the situation as to admissibility of the ...
|
|
|
7 Wis. Prac., Wis. Evidence § 106.1 (2d ed.) Wisconsin Practice Series TM Wisconsin Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Daniel D. Blinka [FNa0] Chapter 901. Evidence--General Provisions 901.06. Limited Admissibility AUTHOR'S COMMENTS § 106.1 The doctrine of limited admissibility
... only against certain parties and not others. [FNa0] Professor Of Law, Marquette University Law School. [FN1] 1 Wigmore on Evidence (Tillers' rev. 1983) ("In a very real sense the entire structure of the modern law of evidence rests on the specialized ...
|
|
|
7 Wis. Prac., Wis. Evidence § 401.2 (2d ed.) Wisconsin Practice Series TM Wisconsin Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Daniel D. Blinka [FNa0] Chapter 904. Evidence--Relevancy and Its Limits 904.01. Definition of "Relevant Evidence" AUTHOR'S COMMENTS § 401.2 Demonstrative and real evidence generally
... acquire relevant knowledge directly, rather than through the intermediate perceptions of another person."); 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 24 at 944 (Tillers rev. 1983) (Wigmore described the concept as "autoptic proference"). [FN3] See § 901.1, infra. [FN4] See State v. Scheidell, 220 ...
|
|
|
4A Wash. Prac., Rules Practice CrR 3.5 (6th ed.) Washington Practice Series TM Rules Practice Current Through the 2007 Update Karl B. Tegland [FNa0] Part IV. Rules for Superior Court Superior Court Criminal Rules (CrR) 3. Rights of Defendants (CrR 3.1 to 3.6) CrR 3.5. Confession Procedure
... not apply to admissions by nonparty witnesses, nor do they apply in civil cases. 3 Wigmore on Evidence § 815 (Tillers rev. 1983). 2 Cases and commentary on confessions For case law and detailed commentary on confessions and other matters addressed ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 101.101 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article I. General Provisions Rule 101. Scope General Applicability § 101.101 Scope; general applicability[FN1]
... KIRKPATRICK §§ 591 to 596 (2d ed. 1994); TANFORD §§ 1.01 to 1.10 (5th ed. 2003); 1 WIGMORE § 4 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN2] The common law rules do not apply when Evid.R. 101(c) makes the Evidence Rules inapplicable to a ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 101.303 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article I. General Provisions Rule 101. Scope Rules Inapplicable § 101.303 Rules inapplicable: Miscellaneous proceedings--Proceedings relating to extradition
... law rule, in light of the difficulty of procuring perfect evidence from another jurisdiction. 1 WIGMORE § 4, at 75 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN2] Bovio v. U.S., 989 F.2d 255, 259 (7th Cir. 1993) (unsworn statement repeating statement of alleged accomplice). ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 105.101 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article I. General Provisions Rule 105. Limited Admissibility § 105.101 Multiple admissibility, generally[FN1]
... to 105.04 (9th ed. 2006); 1 MUELLER & KIRKPATRICK §§ 38 to 41 (2d ed. 1994); 1 WIGMORE § 13 (Tillers rev. 1983); TANFORD § 2.10 (5th ed. 2003); 88 C.J.S., Trial §§ 82, 87 to 89; 28 I.L.E. Trial § ...
... court's overruling Defendants' hearsay objection."). 1 MCCORMICK § 59, at 259 (5th ed. 1999). 1 WIGMORE § 13, at 694 (Tillers rev. 1983) ("when an evidentiary fact is offered for one purpose and becomes admissible by satisfying all the rules applicable ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 401.101 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 401. Definition of "Relevant Evidence" § 401.101 Definition of relevant evidence[FN1]
... (9th ed. 2006); 1 MUELLER & KIRPKPATRICK §§ 82 to 89 (2d ed. 1994); 1A WIGMORE §§ 24 to 43 (Tillers rev. 1983); 6 SMITH TRIAL HANDBOOK § 22:4 (2004); TANFORD §§ 5.06, 8.01 to 8.04, 11.02 to 11.03, 15.04 (5th ...
... as to "possible" future medical complications and expenses admissible). See § 702.116 infra [FN11] 1A WIGMORE § 28, at 969 (Tillers rev. 1983) ("the Court will of course allow to be considered only such evidence as is worth submitting to men ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 402.101 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 402. Relevant Evidence Generally Admissible; Irrelevant Evidence Inadmissible § 402.101 Relevant evidence generally admissible; irrelevant evidence generally inadmissible[FN1]
... (9th ed. 2006); 1 MUELLER & KIRKPATRICK §§ 90 to 91 (2d ed. 1994); 1A WIGMORE §§ 24 to 43 (Tillers rev. 1983); 31A C.J.S., Evidence §§ 158 to 166; 12 I.L.E. Evidence §§ 41 to 43. [FN2] U.S. v. Amuso, ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 404.101 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Character Evidence Generally § 404.101 Character evidence to prove conduct; general rule[FN1]
... (9th ed. 2006); 1 MUELLER & KIRKPATRICK §§ 99 to 118 (2d ed. 1994); 1A WIGMORE §§ 52 to 89 (Tillers rev. 1983); 2 WIGMORE §§ 219 to 263, 300 to 370, 385 to 418 (Chadbourn rev. 1979); TANFORD §§ 9.01 ...
... Credibility Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, 5 Hofstra L.Rev. 7, 19 (1976). [FN5] 1A WIGMORE § 52, at 1148 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN6] 1 GRAHAM HANDBOOK § 404:1, at 584 (6th ed. 2006). [FN7] 1 MCCORMICK § 195, at 686 ...
...[FN10] 1A WIGMORE § 52, at 1147-1148 (Tillers rev. 1983). See § 405.101, infra. [FN11] 1 MCCORMICK § 195, at 686 to 692 (5th ed. 1999). ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 404.102 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Character Evidence Generally § 404.102 Rationale for rule
... of character witnesses, and it would result in a definite retrogression of trial procedure."). 1A WIGMORE § 64, at 1400-1402 (Tillers rev. 1983). Some early Indiana case law stated that character evidence is excluded because it is logically irrelevant. Todd v. ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 404.103 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Character Evidence Generally § 404.103 Character in issue
... who should have custody of children, fitness to provide care is of paramount importance."). 1A WIGMORE § 69.1, at 1457 (Tillers rev. 1983) ("Thus, for example, the right of a parent to retain custody of a child may depend on a ...
... to 652 (5th ed. 1999); 22 WRIGHT & GRAHAM § 5235, at 368-369 (1978); 1A WIGMORE §§ 70 to 70.2 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN12] 1 MCCORMICK § 187, at 651 to 652 (5th ed. 1999); 1A WIGMORE § 69.1, at 1479 ...
... rev. 1983). [FN12] 1 MCCORMICK § 187, at 651 to 652 (5th ed. 1999); 1A WIGMORE § 69.1, at 1479 (Tillers rev. 1983). See also Annot., "Employer's Knowledge of Employee's Past Criminal Record as Affecting Liability for Employee's Tortious Conduct," 48 ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 404.105 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Character Evidence Generally § 404.105 Exceptions: (1) Character of accused--Rebuttal by prosecution
... the defendant chooses to offer 'good' character evidence in his own defense. Rule 404(a)(2)."). 1A WIGMORE § 58, at 1198-1203 (Tillers rev. 1983) ("The true reason for this seems to be not any relaxation of the principle [against proof of the ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 404.106 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Character Evidence Generally § 404.106 Exceptions: (2) Character of victim--To prove victim's conduct
... claim would not have been made more or less probable by Watson's testimony."). [FN8] 1A WIGMORE § 63, at 1367-1369 (Tillers Rev. 1983). [FN9] Teague v. State, 269 Ind. 103, 379 N.E.2d 418, 424 (1978) ("there ought to be some other ...
...1A WIGMORE § 63, at 1369 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN15] Brennan v. State, 639 N.E.2d 649, 651 (Ind. 1994) ("A person's reputation for peace and quiet can ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 404.205 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts § 404.205 Test for admissibility--Balancing unfair prejudice and probative value
... irrelevant and highly prejudicial and, therefore, inadmissible on the issue of the defendant's guilt."). 1A WIGMORE § 58.2, at 1212 (Tillers rev. 1983) ("It may almost be said that it is because of the indubitable relevancy of specific bad acts showing ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 404.209 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts § 404.209 Inseparable crimes--Generally
... term, see, e.g., U.S. v. Hill, 953 F.2d 452, 457 n.1 (9th Cir. 1991); 1A WIGMORE § 218, at 1888 (Tillers rev. 1983); 22 WRIGHT & GRAHAM § 5239, at 447 (1978), and its use with regard to extrinsic act evidence ...
... inevitably leads to confusion. For this reason, Wigmore appears to have favored the term "inseparable crimes". 1A WIGMORE § 218 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN18] Anderson v. State, 681 N.E.2d 703, 706 (Ind. 1997) ("This court has determined that the res gestae ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 404.235 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts § 404.235 Non-propensity purposes not listed in rule--Opportunity; capacity
... those locations admissible to rebut defense of impairment by alcohol and alcoholism). [FN7] See 1A WIGMORE § 217, at 1883 (Tillers rev. 1983) ("On a charge of placing a large stone on a railroad track, the previous felonious placing of a ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 405.101 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 405. Methods of Proving Character Reputation or Opinion § 405.101 Proof of character: Generally[FN1]
... (9th ed. 2006); 1 MUELLER & KIRKPATRICK §§ 119 to 122 (2d ed. 1994); 1A WIGMORE §§ 191 to 213 (Tillers rev. 1983); 5 WIGMORE §§ 1608 to 1621 (Chadbourn rev. 1974); 7 WIGMORE §§ 1980 to 1986 (Chadbourn rev. 1978); ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 406.101 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice § 406.101 Habit of an individual[FN1]
... (9th ed. 2006); 2 MUELLER & KIRKPATRICK §§ 123 to 126 (2d ed. 1994); 1A WIGMORE §§ 92 to 99 (Tillers rev. 1983); 2 WIGMORE §§ 375 to 383 (Chadbourn rev. 1979); 6 SMITH TRIAL HANDBOOK §§ 33:4 to 33:7 (2004); ...
... same stimulus on the occasion under inquiry. 1 MCCORMICK § 195 (5th ed. 1999); 1A WIGMORE § 93, at 1610 (Tillers rev. 1983). Other courts declined to accept evidence of habit due to concern that such evidence would become merely another ...
... to concern that such evidence would become merely another guise for inadmissible character evidence. 1A WIGMORE § 92, at 1610-1619 (Tillers rev. 1983). Still other courts admitted habit evidence only if there were no eyewitnesses to the conduct at issue. 23 ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 406.102 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice § 406.102 Routine practice, or custom, of a business or group
... "Proof of Mailing by Evidence of Business or Office Custom," 45 A.L.R.4th 476. [FN32] 1A WIGMORE § 94, at 1631-1632 (Tillers rev. 1983); 2 WEINSTEIN § 406.03[5] at 406-10 to 406-10.1 (2d ed. 2006). [FN33] Cibro Petroleum Products, Inc. v. Sohio ...
|
|
|
12 Ind. Prac., Indiana Evidence § 412.101 (3d ed.) Indiana Practice Series TM Indiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Robert Lowell Miller, Jr.[FNa0] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Rule 412. Evidence of Past Sexual Conduct General Rule of Inadmissibility in Sex Crimes § 412.101 Past sexual conduct of victim or witness in sex crime prosecution: Generally[FN1]
... 412.4 (9th ed. 2006); 2 MUELLER & KIRKPATRICK §§ 155 to 160 (2d ed. 1994); 1A WIGMORE §§ 62, 62.1 (Tillers rev. 1983); 3A WIGMORE § 924a (Chadbourn rev. 1970); TANFORD §§ 17.01 to 17.04 (5th ed. 2003); 75 C.J.S., Rape ...
|
|
|
La. Prac. Evidence Art. 404 (2007 ed.) Louisiana Practice Series Louisiana Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Bobby Marzine Harges[FNa0], Russell L. Jones[FNa1] Chapter 4. Relevancy and Its Limits Art 404. Character evidence generally not admissible in civil or criminal trial to prove conduct; exceptions; other criminal acts
... Weinstein & M. Berger, Weinstein's Evidence ¶; 404[06] (1982); 1A J. Wigmore Evidence in Trials at Common Law § 63 (Tillers rev. 1983). (f) Under certain circumstances, it may be of critical importance to know in advance whether the trial court ...
|
|
|
1 West's Pa. Prac., Evidence § 103-1 (2d ed.) West's(R) Pennsylvania Practice Series TM Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Leonard Packel[FNa0], Anne Bowen Poulin[FNa1] Article I. General Provisions Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence and Commentary Rule 103. Rulings on Evidence Authors' Comments § 103-1 Rulings on Evidence
... (1992) (quoting Packel and Poulin, Pennsylvania Evidence); See McCormick, Evidence § 52 (6th ed. 2006); 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 18 (Tillers rev. 1983). Compare F.R.E. 103 which provides: (a) Effect of erroneous ruling. Error may not be predicated upon a ruling ...
|
|
|
1 West's Pa. Prac., Evidence § 104-1 (2d ed.) West's(R) Pennsylvania Practice Series TM Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Leonard Packel[FNa0], Anne Bowen Poulin[FNa1] Article I. General Provisions Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence and Commentary Rule 104. Preliminary Questions Authors' Comments § 104-1 Preliminary Questions
... Pa. 35, 348 A.2d 103 (1975). [FN2] See McCormick, Evidence § 53 (6th ed. 2006); 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 14.1 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN3] Harris v. Toys R Us-Penn, Inc., 880 A.2d 1270 (Pa.Super.2005). [FN4] See Commonwealth v. Stewart, 483 Pa. ...
|
|
|
1 West's Pa. Prac., Evidence § 105-1 (2d ed.) West's(R) Pennsylvania Practice Series TM Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Leonard Packel[FNa0], Anne Bowen Poulin[FNa1] Article I. General Provisions Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence and Commentary Rule 105. Limited Admissibility Authors' Comments § 105-1 Limited Admissibility
... 574 Pa. 594, 832 A.2d 1026 (2003). See McCormick, Evidence § 59 (6th ed. 2006). 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 13 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN4] Commonwealth v. Johnson, 457 Pa. 554, 327 A.2d 632 (1974); Bialek v. Pittsburgh Brewing Co., 430 Pa. ...
|
|
|
1 West's Pa. Prac., Evidence § 133-1 (2d ed.) West's(R) Pennsylvania Practice Series TM Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Leonard Packel[FNa0], Anne Bowen Poulin[FNa1] Article I. General Provisions Related Evidence Law § 133-1. Discretion of the Trial Court
... A.2d 242 (1992); Soda v. Baird, 411 Pa.Super. 80, 600 A.2d 1274 (1991). [FN3] See 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 16 (Tillers rev. 1983). See also Commonwealth v. Robinson, 554 Pa. 293, 721 A.2d 344 (1998). [FN4] Commonwealth v. Haber, 351 Pa.Super. ...
...[FN5] See 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 16 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN6] See Pa.R.E.104. [FN7] See 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 16 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN8] See, e.g., Pa.R.E. 403. ...
|
|
|
1 West's Pa. Prac., Evidence § 134 (2d ed.) West's(R) Pennsylvania Practice Series TM Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Leonard Packel[FNa0], Anne Bowen Poulin[FNa1] Article I. General Provisions Related Evidence Law § 134. Conflict of Laws
...[FNa1] Member Of The Pennsylvania Bar, Professor, Villanova University School Of Law. [FN1] See 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 5 (Tillers rev. 1983); McCormick, Evidence § 73.2 (4th ed. 1992); Scoles and Hay, Conflict of Laws §§ 12.10- 12.14 (1982). ...
|
|
|
1 West's Pa. Prac., Evidence § 403-1 (2d ed.) West's(R) Pennsylvania Practice Series TM Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Leonard Packel[FNa0], Anne Bowen Poulin[FNa1] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence and Commentary Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time Authors' Comments § 403-1 Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time
... Kasych v. Commonwealth Dept. of Transportation, 11 Pa.Cmwlth. 621, 314 A.2d 575 (1974). But see 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 37.2 (Tillers rev. 1983) (suggesting that most questions of admissibility require the trial judge to assess the weight of the evidence). [FN4] ...
|
|
|
1 West's Pa. Prac., Evidence § 404-2 (2d ed.) West's(R) Pennsylvania Practice Series TM Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Leonard Packel[FNa0], Anne Bowen Poulin[FNa1] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence and Commentary Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible To Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Authors' Comments § 404-2 Character as an Element of Claim or Defense
... Kemerer, 44 Pa. 452 (1863) (seduction). See also McCormick, Evidence § 187 (5th ed. 1999); 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 170 (Tillers rev. 1983). But see Hopkins v. Tate, 255 Pa. 56, 61, 99 A. 210, 212 (1916) (" 'Character' and 'reputation' ...
... 49 Pa. 210 (1865); Good v. Grit Publishing Co., 36 Pa.Super. 238 (1908). [FN5] See 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 70.1 (Tillers rev. 1983). Proof of bad reputation or character, however, is not admissible to prove the truth of a defamatory statement ...
... present fitness and not the nature and extent of her past misconduct). [FN15] See generally 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 69.1 (Tillers rev. 1983). Before Pennsylvania adopted the objective definition of entrapment, a defense of entrapment may have placed character in issue. ...
|
|
|
1 West's Pa. Prac., Evidence § 404-3 (2d ed.) West's(R) Pennsylvania Practice Series TM Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Leonard Packel[FNa0], Anne Bowen Poulin[FNa1] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence and Commentary Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible To Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Authors' Comments § 404-3 Character of the Accused
...[FN34] Wigmore and McCormick caution against the use of this phrase. See 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 69.1 at p. 1478 (Tillers rev.1983) and McCormick, Evidence § 191 (6th ed. 2006). Nevertheless, the Pennsylvania courts use the term to describe a defendant's ...
|
|
|
1 West's Pa. Prac., Evidence § 404-10 (2d ed.) West's(R) Pennsylvania Practice Series TM Evidence Current through the 2007 Update Leonard Packel[FNa0], Anne Bowen Poulin[FNa1] Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence and Commentary Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible To Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes Authors' Comments § 404-10 Criminal Cases--Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts Evidence Offered by the Accused
...[FN3] Commonwealth v. Boyle, 470 Pa. 343, 359, 368 A.2d 661, 669 (1977). See also 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 142 (Tillers rev. 1983). But see Commonwealth v. Rivers, 537 Pa. 394, 644 A.2d 710 (1994) (Boyle does not require court to ...
... 217 (1996). [FN8] Commonwealth v. Smith, 502 Pa. 600, 467 A.2d 1120 (1983). See also 1A Wigmore, Evidence § 84 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN9] See Commonwealth v. Peetros, 517 Pa. 260, 535 A.2d 1026 (1987) (error not to permit accused to ...
...[FN11] Commonwealth v. Santos, 275 Pa. 515, 119 A. 596 (1923). See also 1A Wigmore, Evidence §§ 143-44 (Tillers rev. 1983). [FN12] Commonwealth v. Eubanks, 511 Pa. 201, 512 A.2d 619 (1986); Commonwealth v. Bailey, 450 Pa. 201, 299 ...
|
|
|
Louisiana Evidence Art. 404 |