Thursday, February 12, 2009

Prior False Accusation Evidence and the Confrontation Clause

See Jules Epstein, "True Lies: The Constitutional and Evidentiary Bases for Admitting Prior False Accusation Evidence in Sexual Assault Prosecutions," 24 Quinnipiac Law Review 609, 612-613 (2006)(footnote omitted)("[This] article ... returns attention to the cross-examination aspect of the Confrontation Clause guarantee, one that has been overlooked as recent decisional law and scholarship have focused on the Clause's limitations on the use of hearsay evidence following the Court's 2004 decision in Crawford v. Washington [541 U.S. 36 (2004)]. 17 [This] article suggests that the historic roots of the Confrontation Clause guarantee the right to impeach a testifying witness with proof of 'corruption,' a category that includes the making of false accusations.")

the dynamic evidence page

coming soon: the law of evidence on Spindle Law

Post a Comment