News & Analysis as of

Criminal Procedure › Federal Rules of Evidence

Miller Canfield

Junk Science or Relevant Evidence: Supreme Court Says Experts May Now Aid in Determining Criminal Intent

Miller Canfield on

In criminal cases, oftentimes the most significant element in dispute is whether the defendant harbored the intent to “knowingly” or “willfully” violate the criminal law at issue.  If the defendant denies that he knew what he...more

Benesch

U.S. Supreme Court Allows Prosecutors a Game-Changing Weapon: Broad Expert Testimony on Criminal Intent

Benesch on

Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b) provides that experts in criminal cases cannot state an opinion about the defendant’s mens rea. That is, the expert must not state an opinion about “whether the defendant did or did not have a...more

McManis Faulkner

Evidentiary Privileges in California And Federal Courts: A Brief Comparison [Part 4 of 5]

McManis Faulkner on

Attorneys who appear in both state and federal courts must be familiar with the differences between the two systems. While some rules have harmonized over time,[1] other procedures are entirely distinct. As a matter of...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Divided Panel Debates a Jury’s Ability to Resist the Persuasive Power of Hollywood

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on

In United States v. Monsalvatge (Nos. 14-1113, 14-1139, and 14-1206), a divided panel of the Second Circuit explored the contentious topic of introducing blockbuster films as evidence in a criminal prosecution. Defendants...more

4 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide