Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Essay Available:
Pages:
2 pages/≈550 words
Sources:
5 Sources
Style:
APA
Subject:
Creative Writing
Type:
Case Study
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 7.2
Topic:

Legal Case Analysis: Frye V. United States, Hammon V. Indiana, Melendez- Diaz V. Massachusetts

Case Study Instructions:
Nearly every legal constraint on the collection and presentation of forensic or testimonial evidence in a federal criminal proceeding emanates from the 4th and 5th Amendments, and is applied to state-level cases by the 14th Amendment. Case law has not only affirmed the applicability of these constitutional rights; it has provided and continues to provide definitions, exceptions, and direction. Most importantly, the courts have shaped the "exclusionary rule" as the consequence for violation of these protections. The criminal investigator must have a comprehensive knowledge of these court decisions, the principles in which they are grounded, and their application to the investigation at hand. You shall submit a total of four case law reviews describing two pivotal cases allowing or disallowing the handling (search, seizure, collection, procession, court presentation, etc.) of forensic evidence, and two pivotal cases allowing or disallowing the handling (capturing, recording, soliciting, etc.) of testimonial evidence. The second case for each category may not be merely the application of a federal ruling to state-level cases under the provisions of the 14th Amendment. The choice of the cases is left to you, but must be pre-approved by your instructor as appropriate for this assignment. You will submit your legal case selection via the Assignments folder as follows: 1. Forensic Evidence 1: Case Name ____________, Citation __________________ 2. Forensic Evidence 2: Case Name ____________, Citation __________________ 3. Testimonial Evidence 1: Case Name ____________, Citation __________________ 4. Testimonial Evidence 2: Case Name ____________, Citation __________________ The instructor will respond with a message indicating approval or other direction. After receiving instructor approval, you will submit the four legal case reviews. For each case, you will provide a brief overview of the facts of the case provide the determination of the court describe the legal reasoning or rationale used by the court to reach its decision describe the implications of the ruling on the conduct of criminal investigations Note: This is not an opportunity for you to express your personal opinion on whether the court was right or wrong in its decision. However, you may include authoritative commentary from creditable sources with appropriate citation. Grading for this project will be based on the comprehensiveness of the constitutional/legal principles applicable to the decision your understanding of the ramifications of the court's decision for criminal investigations the clarity and efficiency of your writing Review of this project will help the instructor assess your ability to communicate effectively across a wide variety of stakeholders identify constitutional and statutory parameters for conducting criminal investigations @@@
Case Study Sample Content Preview:
1 Forensic Evidence 1: Frye V. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C ... 1923) Frye had been convicted of second degree murder. His lawyer wanted the court to hear the testimony of the scientist who had earlier conducted what was then being referred to as a systolic blood pressure deception test ( today`s lie detector) which he said would exonerate his client by determining he was telling the truth. The court in its determination upheld the ruling of the lower court saying (verbatim) "when scientific principle or discovery crosses the line between experimental and demonstrable state is difficult to define. Somewhere this twilight zone the evidence force of principle must be recognized …." The court went on to say that the court had a long way to go before admitting expert testimonial from a well recognized scientific principle of discovery. (Garcia, 2002) It was the courts view that the systolic blood pressure deception test had not gained general acceptance in the realm of science and was thus not admissible in court. The ramification of the ruling is that the admissibility of forensics must be anchored by the principle of "general acceptance in the particular field" This means that the scientific fraternity was supposed to be the arbiter of whether a technique or procedure reaches the scientific threshold. (Garcia, 2002) 2 Forensic evidence 2: General Electric Co. et al. V. Joiner, 522 U.S 136 (1997) After Joiner was diagnosed with lung cancer, he sued General Electric and Monsanto. He wanted expert testimony used to confirm that the cancer was caused by his exposure to workplace chemicals that the company which he worked in produced. The court ruled in favor of the company motion to expunge the testimony, saying that the testimony did not meet the "superlative belief or unsupported speculation" threshold. (Putman, 2002) The court of appeal reversed the ruling by the trial court, but that trial court ruling was however reinstated by t...
Updated on
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:
Order

👀 Other Visitors are Viewing These APA Case Study Samples:

HIRE A WRITER FROM $11.95 / PAGE
ORDER WITH 15% DISCOUNT!
Order Now