enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Learned treatise - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_treatise

    Under the Federal Rules of Evidence 803 (18), either party can introduce a learned treatise as evidence, irrespective of whether it is being used to rebut the opposing party. Such texts are now considered an exception to hearsay, with two limitations: [ 3 ]

  3. Law of Ohio - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Ohio

    Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure from VernerLegal; Ohio Rules of Criminal Procedure from VernerLegal; Ohio Rules of Evidence from VernerLegal; Case law: "Ohio", Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School, OCLC 1078785565, Court decisions freely available to the public online, in a consistent format, digitized from the collection of the Harvard Law ...

  4. Mapp v. Ohio - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mapp_v._Ohio

    Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents a prosecutor from using evidence that was obtained by violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, applies to states as well as the federal government.

  5. Federal Rules of Evidence - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rules_of_Evidence

    First adopted in 1975, the Federal Rules of Evidence codify the evidence law that applies in United States federal courts. [1] In addition, many states in the United States have either adopted the Federal Rules of Evidence, with or without local variations, or have revised their own evidence rules or codes to at least partially follow the federal rules.

  6. Old Chief v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Chief_v._United_States

    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 ...

  7. Daubert standard - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard

    In Daubert, the court ruled that nothing in the Federal Rules of Evidence governing expert evidence "gives any indication that 'general acceptance' is a necessary precondition to the admissibility of scientific evidence. Moreover, such a rigid standard would be at odds with the Rules' liberal thrust and their general approach of relaxing the ...

  8. Ohio Revised Code - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_Revised_Code

    The Ohio Revised Code (ORC) contains all current statutes of the Ohio General Assembly of a permanent and general nature, consolidated into provisions, titles, chapters and sections. [1] However, the only official publication of the enactments of the General Assembly is the Laws of Ohio ; the Ohio Revised Code is only a reference.

  9. Prior consistent statements and prior inconsistent statements

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_consistent...

    However, under Federal Rule of Evidence 801 and the minority of U.S. jurisdictions that have adopted this rule, a prior inconsistent statement may be introduced as evidence of the truth of the statement itself if the prior statement was given in live testimony and under oath as part of a formal hearing, proceeding, trial, or deposition. [2]