Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The "Data Colada" blog was launched two years later, in 2013, carrying the tagline "Thinking about evidence, and vice versa", becoming what the New York Times described as "a hub for nerdy discussions of statistical methods — and, before long, various research crimes and misdemeanors".
Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (1997), discussed the limitation on admitting relevant evidence set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Under this rule, otherwise relevant evidence may be excluded if the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, or considerations of undue delay ...
In one 2008 case, Ronnie Tienda Jr. was convicted of a gang-related homicide in Texas built mainly on incriminating photos and words that he had posted openly on his MySpace page. Today, a person may have their social media information completely private, but their acquaintances or relatives might not be knowledgeable of the law.
Federal courts and judges have repeatedly ordered that any evidence or exhibits tied to Jan. 6 cases be placed in an online portal. But some of those records have “disappeared” over the last ...
Greene, "Thus the term 'Brady violation' is sometimes used to refer to any breach of the broad obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence – that is, to any suppression of so-called 'Brady material' – although strictly speaking, there is never a real 'Brady violation' unless the nondisclosure was so serious that there is a reasonable ...
Sep. 28—LIMA — A hearing was held Thursday in the Allen County Common Pleas Court to determine if a law violation was committed in a man's 1996 murder case. In a motion from Artillis Gibson's ...
The collateral source rule, or collateral source doctrine, is an American case law evidentiary rule that prohibits the admission of evidence that the plaintiff or victim has received compensation from some source other than the damages sought against the defendant. The purpose of the rule is to ensure that the wrongful party pays the full cost ...
Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a violation of the Fourth Amendment requirement that police officers knock, announce their presence, and wait a reasonable amount of time before entering a private residence (the knock-and-announce requirement) does not require suppression of the evidence obtained in the ensuing search.