Criminal Evidence Study Guide PDF

EXAM 1 Overview of Coroners and Medical Examiners Role and Responsibilities of Coroners ​ Coroners are elected officials with minimal training requirements, typically just a high school diploma and the age of 18. ​ Their primary function is to handle the manner of death, not the cause,...

EXAM 1 Overview of Coroners and Medical Examiners Role and Responsibilities of Coroners ​ Coroners are elected officials with minimal training requirements, typically just a high school diploma and the age of 18. ​ Their primary function is to handle the manner of death, not the cause, which limits their investigative scope. ​ Only coroners can initiate a coroner’s inquest, a formal inquiry into the cause of death ​ Coroners do not perform autopsies; this is a key distinction from medical examiners Medical Examiners: Specialized Forensic Pathologists ​ Medical examiners are trained forensic pathologists who can determine the manner and the cause of death ​ Forensic science merges legal and scientific principles, crucial for criminal investigations ​ They conduct autopsies to ascertain the cause of death, which is defined as the specific injury or disease leading to death ​ Manner of death includes classifications such as homicide, suicide, accident, natural causes, or undetermined Legal Framework and Grand Jury System Federalism and the Legal System ​ Federalism divides powers between the federal government and the states, emphasizing state authority ​ The 5th Amendment guarantees the right to a grand jury in federal cases, with variations in state practices ​ Some states utilize both grand jury and preliminary hearing systems, while others may only have one Grand Jury vs. Preliminary Hearing ​ The grand jury serves as a probable cause hearing, where jurors decide if there is enough evidence to indict ​ A true bill is issued if probable cause is found, leading to an indictment and subsequent arrest  ​ In contrast, a preliminary hearing allows defendants the right to know the charges and present a defense, ensuring transparency Types of Evidence in Criminal Law Circumstantial vs. Direct Evidence ​ Circumstantial evidence includes direct indicators, such as the absence of blood or mud at a crime scene ​ Direct evidence consists of tangible proof like autopsy reports, crime scene photographs, and confessions ​ Eye witness testimony, while compelling, is often the least reliable form of evidence Legal Principles Governing Evidence ​ The Bruton Rule restricts the use of a co-conspirator’s confession against a non-declarant unless they can be cross-examined ​ Evidence must be relevant, competent, material, and probative to be admissible in court The Evolution of Criminal Law Historical Development of Law ​ The Code of Hammurabi is recognized as the oldest known legal code, establishing early legal principles ​ Common law, developed in England, emphasizes case law and precedents, influencing American legal systems ​ The Napoleonic Code and Corpus Juris Civilis represent significant legal frameworks that shaped modern law Precedent and Stare Decisis ​ Precedent refers to judicial decisions that guide future cases, ensuring consistency in the legal system ​ Stare Decisis mandates that courts follow established precedents unless a compelling reason exists to deviate ​ The importance of precedent is underscored by cases like Dickerson v. United States, which reinforced adherence to prior rulings Historical Context ​ Code of Hammurabi: One of the earliest known legal codes, establishing principles of justice and punishment  ​ Common Law: Originating in England, this system relies on case law and judicial precedents, which have influenced American law significantly ​ Civil Law: Developed during the Roman Empire, it emphasizes codified statutes and legal principles, contrasting with common law’s reliance on case precedents ​ Twelve Tables: Ancient Roman laws that laid the foundation for future legal systems, emphasizing the importance of written law ​ Napoleonic Code: A comprehensive set of laws that influenced many legal systems worldwide, including Louisiana’s legal framework ​ Corpus Juris Civilis: A fundamental compilation of Roman law that has shaped modern legal systems Legal Systems and Sources of Law ​ Substantive vs. Procedural Law: Substantive law defines criminal behavior, while procedural law outlines the processes for adjudicating those behaviors ​ Mala in Se vs. Mala Prohibita: Distinguishes between inherently wrong acts and those deemed wrong due to legal prohibition ​ Precedent and Stare Decisis: The doctrine that courts should follow previous rulings to ensure consistency in the law, with significant implications for legal decisions ​ Sources of Law in the American System: Includes constitutions, statutes, and administrative regulations, with a focus on state sovereignty in criminal law ​ Federal vs. State Law: Most criminal offenses are defined by state law, with federal law applying only in specific areas, such as organized crime under RICO ​ Judicial Review: The power of courts to invalidate laws that conflict with the Constitution, a key feature of the American legal system The Foundations of Criminal Law Key Legal Principles ​ Bruton Rule: A co-conspirator’s confession can only be used against a non-declarant if the co-conspirator testifies. If the confession is redacted to remove references to the non-declarant, it may be admissible. ​ Four Pleas in the Criminal Justice System: Includes guilty, not guilty, not guilty because of insanity, and not guilty by self-defense. Each plea has specific legal implications and requirements.  ​ Mens Rea: Refers to the ‘guilty mind’ necessary for criminal liability, encompassing intentional, reckless, and negligent states of mind ​ Concurrence: The requirement that the actus reus (the act) and mens rea (the intent) occur simultaneously for a crime to be established ​ Causation: The relationship between the act and the harm caused, which must be established in criminal cases ​ Legality and Punishment: Laws must be clearly defined, and punishments must be proportionate to the crime Types of Criminal Defenses ​ Affirmative Defense: Acknowledges the act but denies the intent, such as in cases of self-defense or insanity ​ Insanity Defense: Rarely successful due to vague definitions of insanity; requires proof that the defendant was unable to understand the nature of their actions ​ Duress and Coercion: Involves acting under extreme pressure or threat, which can mitigate liability ​ Entrapment: A defense claiming that the defendant was induced by law enforcement to commit a crime they would not have otherwise committed ​ Intoxication: Can be used as a defense to mitigate responsibility, depending on the circumstances and jurisdiction ​ Mistake or Ignorance of Law: A defense that argues the defendant was unaware of the law or misunderstood it Key Figures and Concepts in Evidence Law John Wigmore and Evidence Law ​ John Wigmore: A pivotal figure in American evidence law, known for his comprehensive treatise on the subject and influence on Supreme Court decisions ​ Sixteen Systems of Law: Wigmore identified various legal systems, including Egyptian, Roman, and English, highlighting the diversity of legal traditions ​ Evidence Definition: Evidence is anything that helps establish the truth in legal proceedings, requiring relevance, competence, and materiality ​ Evolution of Evidence Law: Traces the development of legal standards for evidence from ancient codes to modern practices  ​ Importance of Evidence: The role of evidence in establishing guilt or innocence in criminal trials, emphasizing the need for rigorous standards ​ Case Law and Evidence: The reliance on judicial decisions to shape the rules and standards of evidence in contemporary law Misconceptions and Realities of Law Enforcement Understanding Law Enforcement Powers ​ Misconceptions of the FBI: Many believe the FBI functions as a national police force, which is inaccurate as the Constitution does not grant such powers ​ State Sovereignty: Each state has its own Constitution and criminal code, emphasizing the decentralized nature of law enforcement in the U.S. ​ Federal Criminal Code: Known as TITLE 18, it outlines federal crimes, but most offenses are governed by state law ​ No National Police Force: The U.S. lacks a national police force; federal agencies have specific jurisdictions and responsibilities ​ Role of Local Law Enforcement: Local police are the primary enforcers of criminal law, with federal agencies supporting in specific cases ​ Judicial Review of Legislation: Courts can nullify laws that violate constitutional principles, ensuring checks and balances in the legal system Historical Foundations of U.S. Law The Magna Carta and Its Influence ​ The Magna Carta, signed in 1215, was a pivotal agreement between King John and his Barons, establishing the principle that everyone, including the king, is subject to the law ​ It introduced key legal concepts such as Habeas Corpus, ensuring that no one can be detained without just cause, and the Confrontation Clause, which guarantees the right to confront one’s accusers ​ The document laid the groundwork for the development of constitutional law in the U.S., influencing both the Constitution and the Bill of Rights ​ The Magna Carta’s emphasis on due process is echoed in the 5th and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantee due process rights to all citizens ​ Its legacy is seen as a cornerstone of democracy and individual rights, inspiring future legal frameworks around the world The U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights ​ The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, establishing the framework for the federal government and its relationship with the states ​ The Bill of Rights, comprising the first ten amendments, specifically addresses individual rights and criminal procedure, ensuring protections against government overreach ​ Each amendment serves a distinct purpose, such as the 1st Amendment’s protection of free speech and religion, and the 4th Amendment’s safeguards against unreasonable searches and seizures ​ The 5th Amendment is crucial for due process, outlining rights related to self-incrimination and double jeopardy, while the 6th Amendment guarantees the right to a fair trial ​ The 8th Amendment prohibits excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment, with landmark cases like Furman v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia shaping its interpretation Key Amendments and Their Implications ​ The 1st Amendment protects freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition, forming the bedrock of American democracy ​ The 2nd Amendment affirms the right to bear arms, reflecting historical concerns about state militias and personal defense ​ The 4th Amendment’s requirement for probable cause for searches and seizures is a critical protection against arbitrary government action ​ The 6th Amendment ensures the accused have the right to a speedy trial, an impartial jury, and legal counsel, which is vital for fair legal representation ​ The 14th Amendment extends the protections of the Bill of Rights to the states, ensuring that all citizens receive equal protection under the law Sources of Evidence Law Federal and State Sources ​ Federal sources of evidence law include the Federal Rules of Evidence, which govern the admissibility of evidence in federal courts ​ State sources consist of individual state constitutions and state rules of evidence, which can vary significantly from one state to another  ​ The Uniform Rules of Evidence, although not widely used today, were an early attempt to standardize evidence law across states ​ Understanding the differences between federal and state evidence laws is crucial for legal practitioners working in different jurisdictions Defining Evidence ​ Evidence is defined as any matter of fact that can persuade the mind regarding the existence of another fact, crucial in legal proceedings ​ It must be admissible, meaning it can be presented in court and is relevant to the case at hand ​ All evidence must be introduced by a witness, emphasizing the importance of testimonial evidence in establishing facts ​ The role of evidence is to establish the truth or untruth of disputed facts, which is fundamental to the judicial process The American Criminal Court System Jurisdiction and Federalism ​ The U.S. Constitution established a federal system that recognizes both state and federal sovereignty, leading to a complex legal landscape ​ Jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court to hear a case, which can be limited by geography, subject matter, or the parties involved ​ The framers of the Constitution aimed to prevent autocratic rule by distributing powers between state and federal governments, resulting in a fragmented system ​ Powers not explicitly granted to the federal government are reserved for the states, allowing for diverse legal interpretations and applications Structure of the Federal Courts ​ The Constitution vests judicial power in one Supreme Court and inferior courts established by Congress, ensuring a structured judiciary ​ The Judiciary Act of 1789 laid the foundation for the federal court system, creating district and circuit courts ​ The Supreme Court consists of nine justices, nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, serving life terms to ensure independence  ​ Federal District Courts serve as trial courts, while Circuit Courts handle appeals, with a total of 94 federal judicial districts across the U.S. The Role of the Supreme Court ​ The Supreme Court serves as the court of last resort, with original jurisdiction in specific cases such as disputes between states ​ It has the discretion to hear cases through a writ of certiorari, which allows it to choose which cases to review ​ The Court’s decisions can have far-reaching implications, shaping constitutional law and civil rights in the U.S. ​ Landmark cases often set precedents that influence future rulings and interpretations of the law Overview of the Judicial System Structure of Courts ​ The judicial system is divided into various types of courts, each serving specific functions and jurisdictions ​ Courts of Limited Jurisdiction: Handle minor cases such as traffic violations and small claims; no jury right in most cases ​ Courts of General Jurisdiction: Also known as trial courts, they handle serious criminal cases and civil disputes, with a right to jury trials ​ Intermediate Appellate Courts: Review decisions from lower courts; their rulings are binding unless overturned by higher courts ​ Courts of Last Resort: Typically the state supreme court; has discretionary caseloads and handles significant legal issues Key Legal Principles ​ Rule of Four: Refers to the Supreme Court’s practice of granting certiorari when at least four justices agree to hear a case ​ Rulings from the Supreme Court are binding on all federal courts and applicable to state courts through the 14th Amendment ​ The concept of jurisdiction is crucial; it defines the authority of a court to hear a case based on the type of law and geographical area Courtroom Actors and Their Roles Prosecutors ​ Prosecutors are expected to act as ministers of justice, not merely as advocates for the government ​ They hold various titles such as district attorneys and U.S. attorneys, and their role is critical in the criminal justice process ​ Ethical considerations are paramount; they must balance their duty to the state with the rights of the accused Defense Attorneys ​ Defense attorneys serve as advocates for the accused, ensuring their rights are protected throughout the legal process ​ They must operate within the law while providing the best defense possible for their clients ​ Ethical obligations include maintaining confidentiality and avoiding conflicts of interest Judges ​ Judges act as referees in the courtroom, ensuring fair proceedings and adherence to legal standards ​ Their responsibilities include ruling on motions, providing jury instructions, and maintaining courtroom order ​ Judges can call and question witnesses under certain rules, adding to their role as impartial arbiters The Criminal Justice Process Pre-Trial Proceedings ​ The process begins with a complaint, which initiates prosecution and must detail the alleged offense ​ Arraignment follows booking, where the accused is formally charged and enters a plea ​ Plea Bargaining allows defendants to plead guilty to lesser charges, often in exchange for reduced sentences Trial Process ​ The trial process includes opening statements, examination of witnesses, and closing arguments  ​ Jury Selection involves creating a master list, voir dire, and challenges for cause or peremptory challenges ​ The jury’s deliberation is crucial, with a requirement for a unanimous verdict in felony cases Historical Context and Evolution of the Judicial System Historical Development ​ The jury system has roots in the Statute of Westminster I (1275), which mandated compulsory testimony ​ Early trial methods included trial by battle and ordeal, reflecting the evolution of legal standards over time ​ The contemporary jury system typically includes 12 jurors, though smaller juries are permissible in some cases Significant Legal Cases and Principles ​ The Batson Rule prohibits excluding jurors based on race, ensuring fair representation in jury selection ​ The Dynamite Charge is a judicial instruction aimed at encouraging jurors to reach a consensus, particularly in deadlocked cases ​ Reversible Error refers to a mistake in the trial process that may warrant a new trial or appeal Understanding Evidence Definition of Evidence ​ Evidence is any means that seeks to establish or prove the veracity of a fact in question ​ It can be represented by material objects, scientific analysis, or eyewitness accounts ​ Not all material that establishes truth is admissible in court, emphasizing the importance of legal standards Types of Evidence ​ Real Evidence: Perceived through the five senses; the object itself rather than representations or opinions ​ Direct Evidence: Proves a fact without inference or presumption, e.g., eyewitness testimony  ​ Circumstantial Evidence: Requires inference to prove a fact, e.g., fingerprints at a crime scene Relevance and Admissibility Legal Standards for Relevance ​ According to FRE 401, relevant evidence makes the existence of a consequential fact more or less probable ​ Relevance weighs the probity of evidence, but not all relevant evidence is admissible due to various legal constraints Factors Affecting Admissibility ​ Evidence may be excluded if it is prejudicial, illegally collected, cumulative, or time-consuming ​ The court must balance the probative value against the potential for unfair prejudice Circumstantial Evidence Inferences from Circumstantial Evidence ​ Circumstantial evidence can imply guilt or innocence through indirect means, such as opportunity or motive ​ Examples include concealment of evidence, sudden wealth, or flight to avoid prosecution Types of Circumstantial Evidence ​ Circumstantial Admissions: Actions or statements that imply guilt, such as adoptive admissions or failure to call witnesses ​ Circumstantial Evidence of a Guilty Mind: Patterns of behavior, such as modus operandi or prior bad acts, can suggest intent Legal Principles and Case Law Important Legal Cases ​ U.S. v. Hale: Addresses the implications of a defendant’s refusal to testify and its impact on jury perception ​ Carter v. Kentucky (1981): Established the judge’s obligation to minimize jury bias regarding a defendant’s silence Substitutions for Evidence ​ Stipulations: Agreements between opposing counsels on specific facts of the case, which streamline the trial process  ​ Presumptions: Legal conclusions that can be either conclusive or rebuttable, affecting how evidence is interpreted Conclusion and Key Takeaways Essential Criteria for Evidence ​ All evidence presented in court must be relevant, material, and competent ​ Some evidence is mandated by law, requiring no interpretation by the jury, such as judicial notice Types of Judicial Notice ​ Legislative: Protects statements made on the floor of Congress ​ Adjudicative Facts: Facts that would require proof if not judicially noted, such as the elements of a crime TEXTBOOK STUDY GUIDE: CHAPTERS 1-3 1.1 Historical Foundations of Evidence Law The rules of criminal evidence have evolved over centuries to ensure fairness and justice. Early legal systems relied on superstition, trial by ordeal, and divine intervention to determine guilt. However, as societies progressed, the need for structured legal systems became apparent. ​ Ancient Law Codes: ○​ Code of Hammurabi (1754 BCE): One of the earliest legal codes that emphasized retribution (“an eye for an eye”) ○​ Roman Law (Justinian Code, 529 CE) – Introduced more formal legal procedures and judicial decision-making ○​ English Common Law – Developed over time through judicial decisions and established precedents ​ Influence of Common Law: ○​ The common law system originated in England and was built on stare decisis (let the decision stand), meaning courts rely on past rulings to decide new cases ○​ This system forms the basis for the U.S. evidence law today 1.2 The Development of Evidence Rules As legal systems advanced, rules of evidence were created to ensure that only reliable and relevant information was presented in court.  ​ Key Legal Principles: ○​ Relevance – Evidence must relate directly to the case ○​ Materiality – Evidence must be significant in proving or disproving a fact ○​ Competence – Evidence must be obtained legally and must meet reliability standards ​ The Role of the U.S. Constitution: ○​ Fourth Amendment – Protects against illegal searches and seizures ○​ Fifth Amendment – Protects against self-incrimination ○​ Sixth Amendment – Guarantees the right to confront witnesses and have a fair trial 2.1 Federalism and Jurisdiction The United States operates under a federalist system, meaning power is divided between federal and state governments. ​ Federal vs. State Jurisdiction: ○​ Federal courts handle cases involving federal law, constitutional issues, and interstate crimes ○​ State courts handle most criminal cases (murder, robbery, assault, etc.) ​ Dual Sovereignty Doctrine: ○​ Federal and state governments can prosecute the same crime separately if it violates both federal and state laws (e.g., drug trafficking) 2.2 Structure of the U.S. Court System The court system is divided into trial courts, appellate courts, and the Supreme Court. 1.​ Trial Courts (District or State Courts) – Where criminal cases begin; evidence is presented, and witnesses testify 2.​ Appellate Courts (Circuit Courts) – Review trial court decisions for legal errors but do not re-examine evidence 3.​ The U.S. Supreme Court – The highest court; decides constitutional issues and sets legal precedents 2.3 The Criminal Justice Process A criminal case follows several steps, each with different rules of evidence. 1.​ Investigation & Arrest  a.​ Police gather evidence, and a suspect may be taken into custody if there is probable cause b.​ Exclusionary Rule (Mapp v. Ohio, 1961) – Evidence obtained illegally cannot be used in courts 2.​ Pre-Trial Procedures a.​ Initial Appearance – Suspect is informed of charges b.​ Grand jury or preliminary hearing – Determines whether there is enough evidence to proceed c.​ Plea Bargaining – Many cases are resolved through negotiated pleas 3.​ Trial a.​ Burden of Proof – The prosecution must prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt” b.​ Rules of Evidence determine what can be presented in court 4.​ Appeals a.​ If a conviction is challenged, an appellate court will review whether legal errors occurred 3.1 Types of Evidence Evidence is divided into several categories, each with different rules for admissibility: 1.​ Testimonial Evidence – Statements made by witnesses under oath a.​ Lay Witness – Provides firsthand accounts (e.g., eye witness) b.​ Expert Witness – Offers professional opinions based on specialized knowledge 2.​ Real (Physical) Evidence – Tangible objects presented in court a.​ Weapons, fingerprints, DNA samples, etc. 3.​ Documentary Evidence – Written or recorded materials a.​ Contracts, police reports, emails, text messages, etc. 4.​ Demonstrative Evidence – Visual aids used to explain evidence a.​ Diagrams, crime scene reconstructions, videos 3.2 Admissibility of Evidence For evidence to be admissible, it must meet three key standards: ​ Relevance – Evidence must be directly related to proving a fact ​ Materiality – Evidence must be significant enough to influence the case outcome ​ Competence – Evidence must come from a reliable source and be lawfully obtained 3.3 The Hearsay Rule Hearsay is an out-of-court statement made by someone other than the witness, presented as evidence. It is generally inadmissible because it is unreliable. ​ Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule ○​ Certain types of hearsay are allowed under exceptions, including: ​ Excited Utterances – Statements made under stress (e.g., “He’s got a gun!”) ​ Dying Declarations – Statements made by someone who believes they are about to die ​ Statements Against Interest – Statements that go against the speaker’s self-interest Notable Cases ​ Dickerson v. United States (2000): This case reaffirmed the necessity of issuing Miranda warnings to criminal suspects and determined that Congress could not legislatively overturn the Miranda v. Arizona decision ​ Mapp v. Ohio (1961): Extended the exclusionary rule to state courts, requiring that illegally obtained evidence be excluded from trials ​ United States v. Leon (1984): Created the good faith exception, allowing evidence from a warrant with errors if police acted in good faith ​ Miranda v. Arizona (1966): Required law enforcement to inform suspects of their right to remain silent and right to an attorney before questioning ​ Gideon v. Wainwright (1963): Guaranteed the right to an attorney for defendants in state criminal cases who cannot afford one ​ Duncan v. Louisiana (1968): Guaranteed the right to a jury trial in state courts for serious offenses ​ Crawford v. Washington (2004): Strengthened the Confrontation Clause, ensuring a defendant’s right to cross-examine witnesses ​ Terry v. Ohio (1968): Established the legality of stop and frisk if police have reasonable suspicion of criminal activity ​ Atkins v. Virginia (2002): The Supreme Court ruled that executing individuals with intellectual disabilities violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment ​ Rochin v. California (1952): The Supreme Court ruled that forcibly pumping a suspect’s stomach to obtain evidence violated the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, as it shocked the conscience and constituted police misconduct ​ Furman v. Georgia (1972): The Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty, as applied at the time, was unconstitutional under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments because it was imposed in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner. This decision temporarily halted capital punishment in the U.S. until states reformed their sentencing guidelines. ​ Gregg v. Georgia (1976): The Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is constitutional under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, as long as sentencing guidelines provide objective criteria and allow for judicial review. This decision reinstated capital punishment in the U.S. after Furman v. Georgia temporarily halted it. ​ United States v. Hale (1975): The Supreme Court ruled that the prosecution cannot use a defendant’s post-arrest silence to impeach their credibility at trial. This decision reinforced Miranda rights and the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination. ​ Carter v. Kentucky (1981): The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a trial judge must, upon request, instruct the jury not to draw negative inferences from a defendant’s decision to remain silent, reinforcing the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination. ​ Brady v. Maryland (1963): Required prosecutors to disclose exculpatory evidence to defendants