Reconsidering the role of judicial notice in establishing the reliability of forensic science evidence
Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||By taking judicial notice of the reliability of forensics based on mere admission in prior cases, courts risk admitting evidence that is entirely untested, if not unreliable. Moreover, by foregoing any independent review of the science in favor of judicial notice, courts fail to recognize advances in the science and continue to accept evidence even after their scientific bases have become doubtful. In light of these problems, this Paper argues that trial courts should not take judicial notice of the reliability of forensic science evidence unless another court within the jurisdiction subjected the theory or method in question to an adversar-ial hearing and subsequently admitted the evidence. Before using a prior adversarial hearing as a predicate for judicial notice, however, the judge must expressly evaluate the adequacy of that hearing to ensure that the volume and veracity of the evidence presented, whether evi-dence of unreliability was presented by the defense, and whether admis-sion of the evidence was of central importance to the case indicate that reliability was extensively and competently litigated.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Kent W. Staley (2004). Robust Evidence and Secure Evidence Claims. Philosophy of Science 71:467-488.
Jennifer L. Mnookin (2008). Of Black Boxes, Instruments, and Experts: Testing the Validity of Forensic Science. Episteme 5 (3):pp. 343-358.
Simon A. Cole, Toward Evidence-Based Evidence: Supporting Forensic Knowledge Claims in the Post-Daubert Era.
Kent W. Staley (2004). Robust Evidence and Secure Evidence Claims. Philosophy of Science 71 (4):467-488.
Richard Gott (2003). Understanding and Using Scientific Evidence: How to Critically Evaluate Data. Sage.
Jules Epstein, Avoiding Trial by Rumor: Identifying the Due Process Threshold for Hearsay Evidence After the Demise of the Ohio V. Roberts 'Reliability' Standard.
Added to index2009-03-12
Total downloads3 ( #213,731 of 739,350 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,538 of 739,350 )
How can I increase my downloads?