Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States and written by Justice Antonin Scalia that established the test used to determine whether a hearsay statement is "testimonial" for Confrontation Clause purposes. Two years prior to its publication, in Crawford v.
For example, when an individual with a criminal record testifies in their own trial, that past record can be presented to persuade the jury that they are the kind of person who would have done what they are accused of in the present. In a sense, the critics' worries have come to pass because relevant scholarship indicates that there is a ...
For example, Gibson's was able to present evidence and testimony that it did not have a history of racial discrimination, but Oberlin was not able to present contrary evidence. The trial court denied this motion because the Oberlin's excluded evidence was hearsay, a point that Oberlin did not argue against. [24]: 34–36
Historically, to be admissible in court and to ensure maximum reliability and validity, written testimony presented in the form of an affidavit (i.e., the witness would not be appearing in court at the hearing at which the affidavit was considered as evidence) was usually witnessed by another person (in many common law jurisdictions, a notary ...
In the instant case, the Court held that a trial judge could hold the "presumption" that a new witnesses' testimony is perjured due to "a pattern of discovery violations". [24] The pattern in Taylor's case was a series of two amendments to the witness list done in bad faith. [ 25 ] "
An expert witness is a witness, who by virtue of education, training, skill, or experience, is believed to have expertise and specialised knowledge in a particular subject beyond that of the average person, sufficient that others may officially and legally rely upon the witness's specialized (scientific, technical or other) opinion about an evidence or fact issue within the scope of his ...
• June 16, 2007: Nifong loses his law license following disciplinary hearings about his handling of the case, including accusations of ethical misconduct and withholding evidence.
If qualified by the court, then the expert may testify "in the form of an opinion or otherwise" so long as: "(1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case." Although ...