The Daubert standard is the best choice for determining the admissibility of forensic evidence and expert witnesses in Florida based on the articles provided. The evidence and expert witness testimony that is put forth in Florida litigation should be assessed by the same standards that apply for all rules of evidence in federal courts. Although the Frye standard provides a wide scope as to what can be used as evidence, a stricter set of standards would be more beneficial to the public because it would assure litigants that the science has been proven to be reliable. Frye is based more on the opinion of other experts in the field and what is accepted.…
Finally, human error and DNA contamination is a huge concern for ALL free individual’s DNA. Eric Lander in 1990 founded a new center for Genome research at Whitehead, as well as, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Eric Lander has been an expert advisor for the defense on many cases. From Lander’s first hand personal experiences as an expert witness on various court cases, he felt compelled to express his observations of the flaws with DNA fingerprinting identification. Lander’s stated, (1989)…
Overview 1. Forensic Evidence 1: Frye V. United States, Citation ___ (ORSDEL, 1923) Frye had been found guilty of the second-degree murder. His legal representative desired the court to hear the proof of the scientist who had formerly performed as a systolic blood pressure sham test which he said would make his client by verifying he was telling the fact.…
The expenses of applying the exclusionary principle on habeas were nearly incredible. We contemplated that doing as such would not just reject solid proof and occupy consideration from the focal inquiry of blame, however would likewise interfere with general society interest. Rule of Law: The Court of Appeals affirmed the District’s Court ruling. Reference: Withrow v. Williams, 507 U.S. 680, 680, 113 S. Ct. 1745, 1747, 123 L. Ed.…
Police officers did not have the right to approach the porch of Jardines’ house to find evidence, this is know as exclusionary rule,improperly gathered evidence may not be introduce in a criminal…
P. 56(c). While the Court must view inferences in the light most favorable to the nonmovant, “this does not lessen the burden of the non-moving party in any way.” Rollins v. TechSouth, Inc., 833 F.2d 1525, 1528 (11th Cir. 1987). Thus, the nonmovant still bears the burden of providing “sufficient evidence” for every element she must prove. Id. (Citing…
It is understandable that most would feel the use of the exclusionary rule allows the criminal element to otherwise go free on what would be perceived as a technicality, however, I would argue that the existence of such a rule only assures law enforcement and its designees conducts their investigations in such a fashion that the methods used to collect information and evidence are above reproach, thus the fear of having information be excluded is not a factor in their investigation. Additionally, it would be highly unlikely that the exclusion of evidence would be to such a degree that a case would allow for a defendant to go free unless sufficient evidence was not available to secure the conviction, to begin with. I would like to believe that, as in my office, there is more than sufficient evidence available to win a case, and that its fate is not dependent on a single source of information or evidence.…
Elizabeth, I do concede that Dripps model of the contingent exclusionary rule is fascinating; yet, it is my opinion that there are pros and cons. It is without doubt that the present exclusionary rule is controversial. I also concede that there isn’t a need to completely re-invent the wheel. Conversely, Dripps argues in regards of the contingent suppression order in which prosecutors would have to choose between accepting exclusion of evidence obtained through infractions of the Fourth Amendment or accepting the imposition of a damages judgment obtained through infractions of the Fourth Amendment or accepting the imposition of a damages judgment against the state under an administration of statutory damages (Tipton, 2010).…
A woman voluntarily interviewed with police detectives while other officers executed a search warrant at her home. Upon learning of this at the end of the interview, two detectives were unsure if they should let her go. The woman contends that these factors together rendered the interview a custodial interrogation without Miranda warnings thus making her statements inadmissible. A court would likely find, however, that the woman was never in custody because she was never under formal arrest or an equivalent to formal arrest.…
In view of the modification of the exclusionary rule, the Court of Appeals' judgment cannot stand in this case. Only respondent Leon contended that no reasonably well trained police officer could have believed that there existed probable cause to search his house. However, the record establishes that the police officer’s reliance on the state-court judge's determination of…
In the Supreme Court case, Nelson v. Colorado, the judgment revolves around the constitutionality of the Colorado Exoneration Act. This act stated that monetary fines paid due to conviction charges can only be returned to the exonerated individual if they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are innocent of the accused crime. The constitutionality of this law was debated and in question in regards to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. I concur in the recent Supreme Court decision that the Colorado Exoneration Act should be ruled as unconstitutional. I am in assent with this recent decision that the current Colorado law is unconstitutional because it violates the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects United States citizen’s right to a fair trial, undermines the legitimacy and authority of a criminal court proceeding, and also contradicts the precedent established in various courts that…
Overbey v Poteat The following is the Case Summary of Overbey v Poteat. In 1960, the petitioner Overbey commenced this suit in the Sessions Court of Williamson County against the respondent Poteat to recover damages to his automobile, resulting from a collision between the plaintiff's automobile and a black Angus steer owned by the defendant which was loose on the highway. There was a judgment in favor of the defendant in the Sessions Court, the Circuit Court and in the Court of Appeals successively. Poteat”s evidence is as followed.…
One of the most controversial, and perhaps,most important American legal principle, is the exclusionary clause which under Constitutional law, holds that evidence collected or analyzed in violation of defendants constitutional rights is not permitted for use in criminal persecutions. Sparked by the famous case Mapp v. Ohio, the exclusionary rule has a fair share of critics who argue that police blunders let criminals go free. In the 1961 Supreme Court case, Dollree Mapp was convicted when police searched her house ,under a false warrant, for a suspected bomb fugitive and found “lewd, lavicious, or obscene material”, otherwise known as pornography. Mapp claimed the police had no probable cause to search for the obscene materials found; the Court let her go because the material had been seized without a warrant. Despite the occasional occurrence of criminals going free, the exclusionary rule is vital to democracy because the principle ensures liberty and justice in America for all.…
This use of the Frye standard determines if the evidence or scientific testimony is generally acceptable in the scientific community. The Frye standard was used to prove that the peoples motion to use the scientific testimony for the lab tests conducted from the samples taking from the defendants watch was not admissible because of the unaccepted methods used by the scientists who had conducted the Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid test. This use of the Frye standard in the court case allowed the defendant to make what would have been very strong and determining evidence not admissible in court. This is just one example on how court standards can be the deciding factor in many court cases. The use of the Frye Standard in this case had a huge effect on whether the defendant could be charged guilty or not guilty.…