Free Admissible decision rule Essays and Papers

were evidence can be gathered to have the correct overall view of what is and is not evidence. Third all things that may be evidence may be unusable either in defense or prosecution of the defendant. So it becomes essential to understand the ground rules set forth both on the Federal and State level with regards to what evidence is actually permissible in a court of law. Next, we need to analyze to major issues that have become prevalent in our time regarding evidence in the adversary system and the

is presented must be relevant to the case to be admissible. “Relevance refers to any material fact or evidence having a tendency to make the existence of a matter at issue more probable than it would be without said fact (probative value)”(Britz, 2008, p. 344). In this paper, an examination of the legal standard of relevance evidence will be discussed. Furthermore, the rules of inclusion and exclusion of evidence based on the wording of the rules will be scrutinized. In the final section, examples

discuss the aspects of the forth amendment rights in relation to the exclusionary rule, exceptions and holding. The facts on deterrence in court and evaluating the ins and outs of the exclusionary rule what is acceptable and admissible and inadmissible in the United States courts and Supreme Court. This paper will exhibit the constitutional and unconstitutional rights and laws. The future goals of the exclusionary rule and instruction of ethical and unethical choices by officers in relation to law

The first advantages is plays an active part in trial so that the truth can be found. Secondly, there are no strict rules of evidence or procedure which means that all relevant evidence is admissible. Judges assist the police and prosecutor in collecting the evidence, which leads to a more efficient use of time in the trial. Victims of crime also have better access to the legal system. The last advantage of

According to the hearsay rule, the court would normally refuse to admit hearsay evidence. The common doctrine of res gestae had provides an exception to the hearsay rule to admit such evidence. Res gestae is a latin phrase having the literal meaning of things done. It is defined as secondhand statements which is considered trustworthy for the purpose of admission as evidence in a lawsuit when repeated by the witness because they were made naturally, spontaneously and concurrently with an event, thus

Should DNA Evidence be Admissible in Murder Trials? “In matters of truth and justice, there is no difference between large and small problems, for issues concerning the treatment of people are all the same”.(Albert Einstein).Many people have different points of view of what is justice of what happens in the courtroom. Opinions have been heard of whether or not DNA evidence should be admissible in murder trials. Not only have people try to introduce this kind of evidence in their case, but some have

The Rules of Evidence: In today’s society there are rules that define evidence pertaining to a defendant’s trial. These rules are defined as the “The Rules of Evidence” or “The Law of Evidence.” These rules create a safe and orderly environment, promote efficiency, and enhance the quality of evidence that pertain to all criminal trials. These rules restrict what a jury can and cannot hear or see, details of the law, and the importance of the effective performance of the law enforcement officer.

interrogation, and which was ruled admissible or inadmissible by the judge. A no-confession group as a control was also considered. As prescribed by law, jurors observed that high-pressure confession was less voluntary and reported that it had less influence on judges’ decisions. However, as for the verdicts, confession increased the conviction rate. On account of these results Kassin and Sukel (1997) suggested that appellate courts should be cautious in applying the harmless error rule to the admission of forced

The exclusionary rule is one of the utmost controversial rulings in our judicial system. The exclusionary rule can be best defined as “the principle based on federal Constitutional Law that evidence illegally seized by law enforcement officers in violation of a suspect 's right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures cannot be used against the suspect in a criminal prosecution.” (The Free Dictionary , 1981-2015) The exclusionary rule is not to be mistaken as being intertwined within the

Supreme Court decision in this case was one of the most controversial decisions at that time. Up until this decision was made, police in many states had ignored the search and seizure law. I believe this United States Supreme Court case is particularly important because it ultimately defends a person?s Constitutional right to privacy. As stated before, until this decision was made, the search and seizure laws were given little consideration. Although there is always an exception to the rule, for the