enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Anders v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_v._California

    Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), was a United States Supreme Court case in which a court-appointed attorney filed a motion to withdraw from the appeal of a criminal case because of his belief that any grounds for appeal were frivolous.

  3. Frye standard - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frye_standard

    In United States law, the Frye standard, Frye test, or general acceptance test is a judicial test used in some U.S. state courts to determine the admissibility of scientific evidence. It provides that expert opinion based on a scientific technique is admissible only when the technique is generally accepted as reliable in the relevant scientific ...

  4. Relevance (law) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relevance_(law)

    The scheme of Chapter 3 of the Act deals with admissibility of evidence. [24] Evidence which is relevant is generally admissible, and evidence which is irrelevant is inadmissible. [24] Evidence is relevant if it is evidence which, if accepted, could rationally affect (directly or indirectly) the assessment of the probability of a fact in issue ...

  5. Huddleston v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huddleston_v._United_States

    United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that before admitting evidence of extrinsic acts under Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, federal courts should assess the evidence's sufficiency under Federal Rule of Evidence 104(b). Under 104(b), "[w]hen the relevancy of evidence depends ...

  6. Giles v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giles_v._California

    Giles v. California, 554 U.S. 353 (2008), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that for testimonial statements to be admissible under the forfeiture exception to hearsay, the defendant must have intended to make the witness unavailable for trial.

  7. Chapman v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapman_v._California

    The California Constitution at the time said (in Article I § 13), "in any criminal case, whether the defendant testifies or not, his failure to explain or to deny by his testimony any evidence or facts in the case against him may be commented upon by the court and by counsel, and may be considered by the court or the jury."

  8. Rochin v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochin_v._California

    The appeals court denied his defense arguing that the evidence was admissible, despite the egregious behavior of the officers, as it was "competent evidence," and the courts are not allowed to question the means in which it was obtained. As the court wrote, "illegally obtained evidence is admissible on a criminal charge in this state." [4]

  9. Gilbert v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_v._California

    Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263 (1967), was an important decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, which was argued February 15–16, 1967, and decided June 12, 1967. The case involved Fourth Amendment and Fifth Amendment rights, the taking of handwriting exemplars, in-court identifications and warrantless searches.

  1. Related searches only relevant evidence is admissible california case brief study example

    what is a relevant evidenceproof of relevance
    proof of relevance law