Not Precedential United States Court Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Federal Rules of Evidence: 801-03, 901
FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE: 801-03, 901 Rule 801. Definitions The following definitions apply under this article: (a) Statement. A "statement" is (1) an oral or written assertion or (2) nonverbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by the person as an assertion. (b) Declarant. A "declarant" is a person who makes a statement. (c) Hearsay. "Hearsay" is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. (d) Statements which are not hearsay. A statement is not hearsay if-- (1) Prior statement by witness. The declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross- examination concerning the statement, and the statement is (A) inconsistent with the declarant's testimony, and was given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in a deposition, or (B) consistent with the declarant's testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive, or (C) one of identification of a person made after perceiving the person; or (2) Admission by party-opponent. The statement is offered against a party and is (A) the party's own statement, in either an individual or a representative capacity or (B) a statement of which the party has manifested an adoption or belief in its truth, or (C) a statement by a person authorized by the party to make a statement concerning the subject, or (D) a statement by the party's agent or servant concerning a matter within the scope of the agency or employment, made during the existence of the relationship, or (E) a statement by a coconspirator of a party during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy. -
Rule 609: Impeachment by Evidence of Conviction of a Crime
RULE 609: IMPEACHMENT BY EVIDENCE OF CONVICTION OF A CRIME Jessica Smith, UNC School of Government (Feb. 2013). Contents I. Generally .........................................................................................................................1 II. For Impeachment Only. ...................................................................................................2 III. Relevant Prior Convictions. .............................................................................................2 A. Rule Only Applies to Certain Classes of Convictions .............................................2 B. Out-of-State Convictions ........................................................................................3 C. Prayer for Judgment Continued (PJC) ...................................................................3 D. No Contest Pleas ...................................................................................................3 E. Charges Absent Convictions ..................................................................................3 F. Effect of Appeal .....................................................................................................3 G. Reversed Convictions ............................................................................................3 H. Pardoned Offenses ................................................................................................3 I. Juvenile Adjudications ...........................................................................................3 J. Age -
Exploring the Portrayal of Stuttering in It (2017)
POSTS AND G-G-GHOSTS: EXPLORING THE PORTRAYAL OF STUTTERING IN IT (2017) A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Communication, Culture, and Technology By Mary-Cecile Gayoso, B. A Washington, D.C. April 13, 2018 Copyright 2018 by Mary-Cecile Gayoso All Rights Reserved ii Dedication The research and writing of this thesis is dedicated to my parents and the name they gave me MY PARENTS, for always listening, for loving me and all my imperfections, and for encouraging me to speak my mind always MY NAME, for being simultaneously the bane and joy of my existence, and for connecting me to my Mamaw and to the Grandfather I never knew Thank you, I love you, Mary-Cecile iii Acknowledgements “One of the hardest things in life is having words in your heart that you can't utter.” - James Earl Jones This thesis would not have been possible without those that are part of my everyday life and those that I have not spoken to or seen in years. To my family: Thank you for your constant support and encouragement, for letting me ramble about my thesis during many of our phone calls. To my mother, thank you for sending me links about stuttering whenever you happened upon a news article or story. To my father, thank you for introducing me to M*A*S*H as a kid and to one of the most positive representations of stuttering in media I’ve seen. -
Video Evidence a Primer for Prosecutors
Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative Video Evidence A Primer for Prosecutors Even ten years ago, it was rare for a court case to feature video evidence, besides a defendant’s statement. Today, with the increasing use of security cameras by businesses and homeowners, patrol-car dashboard and body-worn cameras by law enforcement, and smartphones and tablet cameras by the general public, it is becoming unusual to see a court case that does not include video evidence. In fact, some estimate that video evidence is involved in about 80 percent of crimes.1 Not surprisingly, this staggering abundance of video brings with it both opportunities and challenges. Two such challenges are dealing with the wide variety of video formats, each with its own proprietary characteristics and requirements, and handling the large file sizes of video evidence. Given these obstacles, the transfer, storage, redaction, disclosure, and preparation of video evidence for evidentiary purposes can stretch the personnel and equipment resources of even the best-funded prosecutor’s office. This primer provides guidance for managing video evidence in the office and suggests steps to take to ensure that this evidence is admissible in court. Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative October 2016 Introduction The opportunities inherent in video evidence cannot be overlooked. It is prosecutors who are charged with presenting evidence to a jury. Today, juries expect video to be presented to them in every case, whether it exists or not.2 As a result, prosecutors must have the resources and technological skill to seamlessly present it in court. Ideally, prosecutors’ offices could form specially trained litigation support units, which manage all video evidence from the beginning of the criminal process through trial preparation and the appellate process. -
The Admission of Government Agency Reports Under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8)(C) by John D
The Admission of Government Agency Reports under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8)(c) By John D. Winter and Adam P. Blumenkrantz or (B) matters observed pursuant having hearsay evidence admitted under to duty imposed by law as to which Rule 803(8)(c) follow from the justifica- matters there was a duty to report, tions for adopting the rule in the first excluding, however, in criminal cases place. The hearsay exception is premised matters observed by police officers on several conditions. First, the rule as- and other law enforcement person- sumes that government employees will nel, or (C) in civil actions . factual carry out their official duties in an honest 2 John D. Winter Adam P. Blumenkrantz findings resulting from an investiga- and thorough manner. This assump- tion made pursuant to authority tion results in the rule’s presumption of n product liability and other tort ac- granted by law, unless the sources of reliability. Second, the rule is based on the tions, plaintiffs may seek to introduce information or other circumstances government’s ability to investigate and re- Igovernment records or documents, indicate lack of trustworthiness. port on complex issues raised in many cas- federal and nonfederal alike, to establish es, from product liability claims to section one or more elements of their claims. In This article focuses specifically on 1983 actions against government officials. this regard, plaintiffs attempt to rely on the third prong of the rule: the use of Government agencies generally possess reports or letters written by government agency records in civil actions that result levels of expertise, resources, and experi- agencies responsible for overseeing the from an agency investigation made ence, including access to information that health, safety, and consumer aspects pursuant to authority granted by law. -
Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Armenia
(not official copy) CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA GENERAL PART Section One : GENERAL PROVISIONS CHAPTER 1. LEGISLATION ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Article 1. Legislation Governing Criminal Proceedings Article 2. Objectives of the Criminal-Procedure Legislation Article 3. Territory of Effect of the Criminal-procedure Law Article 4. Effect of the Criminal-Procedure Law in the Course of Time Article 5. Peculiarities in the Effect of the Criminal-Procedure Law Article 6. Definitions of the Basic Notions Used in the Criminal-procedure Code CHAPTER 2. PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS Article 7. Legitimacy Article 8. Equality of All Before the Law Article 9. Respect for the Rights, Freedoms and Dignity of an Individual Article 10. Ensuring the Right to Legal Assistance Article 11. Immunity of Person Article 12. Immunity of Residence Article 13. Security of Property Article 14. Confidentiality of Correspondence, Telephone Conversations, Mail, Telegraph and Other Communications Article 15. Language of Criminal Proceedings Article 16. Public Trial Article 17. Fair Trial Article 18. Presumption of Innocence Article 19. The Right to Defense of the Suspect and the Accused and Guarantees for this Right Article 20. Privilege Against Self-Incrimination (not official copy) Article 21. Inadmissibility of Repeated Conviction and Criminal Prosecution for the Same Crime Article 22. Rehabilitation of the Rights of the Persons who suffered from Judicial Mistakes Article 23. Adversarial System of Criminal Proceedings Article 24. Administration of Justice Exclusively by the Court Article 25. Independent Assessment of Evidence CHAPTER 3. CONDUCT OF CRIMINAL CASE Article 26. Conduct of Criminal Case Article 27. The Obligation to institute a criminal case and resolution of the crime Article 28. -
Tracking the Research Trope in Supernatural Horror Film Franchises
City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 2-2020 Legend Has It: Tracking the Research Trope in Supernatural Horror Film Franchises Deirdre M. Flood The Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/3574 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] LEGEND HAS IT: TRACKING THE RESEARCH TROPE IN SUPERNATURAL HORROR FILM FRANCHISES by DEIRDRE FLOOD A master’s thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Liberal Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, The City University of New York 2020 © 2020 DEIRDRE FLOOD All Rights Reserved ii Legend Has It: Tracking the Research Trope in Supernatural Horror Film Franchises by Deirdre Flood This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in Liberal Studies in satisfaction of the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Arts. Date Leah Anderst Thesis Advisor Date Elizabeth Macaulay-Lewis Executive Officer THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iii ABSTRACT Legend Has It: Tracking the Research Trope in Supernatural Horror Film Franchises by Deirdre Flood Advisor: Leah Anderst This study will analyze how information about monsters is conveyed in three horror franchises: Poltergeist (1982-2015), A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984-2010), and The Ring (2002- 2018). My analysis centers on the changing role of libraries and research, and how this affects the ways that monsters are portrayed differently across the time periods represented in these films. -
1 General Submission Guidelines for Evidence Control Centers, LIMS, and Pre-Log System
KANSAS BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Forensic Science Center Phone: 785-296-1137 2001 SW Washburn Avenue Fax: 785-368-6564 Topeka, KS 66604 EVIDENCE SUBMISSION GUIDELINES Table of Contents 1 General Submission Guidelines for Evidence Control Centers, LIMS, and Pre-Log System ........................................................................4 1.1 Case and Item Information Submission Guidelines ..........................4 1.2 Packaging and Sealing Guidelines....................................................4 1.3 General Evidence Submission Guidelines ........................................5 1.3.1 Weapons, Firearms, and Explosive Devices....................................................5 1.3.2 Hazardous Chemicals ......................................................................................5 1.3.3 Biohazard Containing Submissions .................................................................6 2 Kansas Bureau of Investigation Laboratory Contacts.......................7 3 Submission Guidelines for Chemistry Evidence................................8 3.1 Scope of Analysis Performed............................................................8 3.2 General Guidelines............................................................................8 3.3 Submission Limits, Weights, and Sampling ......................................9 3.4 Plant Material ..................................................................................10 3.5 Syringes/Liquids..............................................................................10 3.6 -
Physical Evidence Manual
If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. City of Phoenix Physical Evidence Manual 142520 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been granJ;l}\8'enix Police Department (AZ) to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permission of the copyright owner. Phoenix Police Department Crime Detection Laboratory d 5 CITY OF PHOENIX POLICE DEPARTMENT Crime Detection Laboratory WILLIAM J. COLLIER Director Edited by Raymond Gieszl 1990 -------------_._---------------------' CONTENTS I. Introduction ---------------------------------- 3-4 II. Laboratory ------------------------------------- 5 III. Function and Services ------------------------- 6-7 IV. General Instruction for Collection and -------- 8-10 Preservation of Physical Evidence V. Crime Scene Processing and Reconstruction ----- 11-15 VI. Marijuana, Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs ------ 16-18 VII. Prescription Only Drugs ------------------------ 19-20 VIII. Toxicology ------------------------------------ 21-22 IX. Blood stains ---------------------------------- 23-29 X. Hair ------------------------------------------- 30-32 XI. Seminal -
The Role and Impact of Forensic Evidence in the Criminal Justice System, Final Report
The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: The Role and Impact of Forensic Evidence in the Criminal Justice System, Final Report Author: Tom McEwen, Ph.D. Document No.: 236474 Date Received: November 2011 Award Number: 2006-DN-BX-0095 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Institute for Law and Justice, Inc. 1219 Prince Street, Suite 2 Alexandria, Virginia Phone: 703-684-5300 The Role and Impact of Forensic Evidence in the Criminal Justice System Final Report December 13, 2010 Prepared by Tom McEwen, PhD Prepared for National Institute of Justice Office of Justice Programs U.S. Department of Justice This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. -
What Is Evidence Law?
WWhhaat t isis Ev Evidideennccee LLaaww?? n Evidence means anything that tends to prove or disprove any fact during any legal proceeding. n Evidence law is the system that determines which of these facts may be brought up during a trial or hearing. n Evidence law often differs depending on the nature of the proceeding and sometimes based on the subject matter of the trial or hearing. Evidence Lecture 1 Slide 1 WWhhyy H Haavvee E Evvidideennccee LLaaww?? n A fundamental question concerning evidence law is why have it at all? If a trial is supposed to be about the search for the truth, why not just let everything in and let the trier of fact sort it out? n Some answers: n Avoid confusing and diverting the attention of the trier of fact; n Efficiency of the trial process, in terms of time and expense; n Minimize the risk of unfair prejudice; n To the extent possible, avoid admitting false evidence; n Protect other important interests such as privileges.s. Evidence Lecture 1 Slide 2 TThhee R Roolleess oof f tthhee Judg Judgee aanndd JJuurryy n In general, there are roles a court must fill in each case: n Trier of fact (decide, based on the evidence, what happened; and n Trier of Law (apply the rules of evidence and decide other necessary administrative questions). n Where there is a jury, the jury is the trier of fact and the judge is the trier of law n Therefore, it is the judge who makes virtually all decisions on the admissibility of evidence. -
Melbourne It Announces Agreement with Yahoo! Melbourne IT Selected to Provide Domain Registration Services for Yahoo! Melbourne -- February
Melbourne It Announces Agreement With Yahoo! Melbourne IT Selected to Provide Domain Registration Services for Yahoo! Melbourne -- February. 13, 2001 -- Melbourne IT (ASX: MLB), a leading supplier of domain names and e-commerce infrastructure services to the global market, today announced an agreement with Yahoo! Inc. (Nasdaq:YHOO), a leading global Internet communications, commerce and media company. Through the agreement, Melbourne IT will provide .com, .net and .org domain names to users of Yahoo!® Domains (http://domains.yahoo.com), a service Yahoo! launched in May 2000 that allows people to search for, register and host their own domain names. "Yahoo! is synonymous with the Internet, and we believe the credibility associated with the Yahoo! brand will increase our domain name registrations and strengthen our position in the market," said Adrian Kloeden, Melbourne IT's Chief Executive Officer. "The agreement further supports Melbourne IT's strategy to become a leading worldwide provider of domain registration services and highlights our key strengths in providing domain names and related services." Also through the agreement, Melbourne IT will provide backend domain registrations for users of other Yahoo! properties, including Yahoo! Website Services (http://website.yahoo.com), Yahoo! Servers (http://servers.yahoo.com) and the Personal Address feature for Yahoo! Mail (http://mail.yahoo.com), all of which offer users a comprehensive suite of services to create and maintain a presence on the Web. "We are pleased to be working with Melbourne IT to provide Yahoo! Domains users with reliable and comprehensive domain name registration solutions," said Shannon Ledger, vice president and general manager, production, Yahoo!.