EVIDENTIARY ISSUES

See Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745, 751 (1983). In 47 of 50 conveys barbarous convictions argon appealable on a non-discretionary basis and all federal criminal convictions are appealable on a lower floor 28 U.S.C. secs. 1291 and 1294 (Arkin, 1992, February, p. 513). According to Rossman, in the 19th hundred reversals on appeal in criminal cases were relatively scarce primarily because they were not seen as necessary to protect unmarried rights, but only to ensure uniformity in the employment of the law (1990, Fall, p. 549).

Newbauer (1992, Summer) said some state appellant lawcourts issued arbitrary rulings reversing convictions because of minor errors " much(prenominal) as misspellings in the indictment and the standardized" (p. 80). Structural reforms were undertaken in many states, from the 1940s onward, including more(prenominal) intermediate-level appellate courts, more judges and better-trained staffs, which enabled appellate judges to scrutinize more carefully lower court proceedings for error. Kagan et al. (1978, May) said that "state supreme court case loads . . . view as been brought under greater control" (p. 965). They say such courts "in criminal cases, . . . more frequently reversed the lower courts" (p. 999). The Warren motor hotel rulings on the rights of criminal defendants greatly expanded possible essential grounds for reversal and made criminal procedure "increasingly complex" (Davidow & Wright, 1996, Fall, p. 30). Newbauer cited statistics sharpening that the percentage of cri

minal convictions reversed on appeal in Louisiana reached a peak of 28 percent in 1980-1981 (p. 77).

appeals. Rochester, MN: Lawyers Co-operative Publishing.

Conlen, B. (1996, November). let on of the garage. California

According to Purver & Taylor (1980), while evidentiary rulings by the trial court are "one of the most obvious subjects for appellate issues," they are also "one of the least fertile grounds for pursuance reversal" (p. 91.

This is true because of the frequent use by appellate courts of the harmless error rule, which prevents reversal unless the defendant can show that erroneous rulings by the trial judge prejudiced his or her ability to be tried fairly. Purver & Lawrence list ten such areas, ranging from improper admission of turn up which is hearsay, opinion, irrelevant or negative (such as evidence of past convictions), uncorroborated statements of co-conspirators and expert proof for which inadequate foundation was laid. In addition, the judge may have limited defense counsel's cross-examination of government witnesses, which may violate the proper(a) of Confrontation under the 6th Amendment, or suppressed evidence proferred by the defense. A favorite tack of defense lawyers is to invade evidence which has been obtained unconstitutionally, such as through illegal searches and seizures, coerced confessions, and so forth An interesting development in that respect is the emergence in some states such as Texas of criminal appellate courts which are more, not less, liberal than the U.S. Supreme Court in proper(postnominal) areas of criminal procedure (Schneider, 1999, Summer, p. 1597).

Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!