The Rules of Evidence Essay

Physical evidence is anything that can establish a crime has occurred and anything that links the crime to a criminal. Three examples of physical evidence are fibers, weapons, and hair.

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizures. (People v. Williams 20 Cal.4th 125.) A defendant may move to suppress as evidence any tangible or intangible thing obtained as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure without a warrant. (Penal Code §1538.5(a)(1)(A).) Warrantless searches and seizures are presumptively unreasonable. (Williams, supra, 20 Cal.4th 119; see also Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993) 508 U.S. 366 (stating searches and seizures conducted outside the judicial process are per se unreasonable unless subject to an established exception).) While the defendant has the initial burden of raising the warrantless search issue before the court, this burden is satisfied when the defendant asserts the absence of a warrant and makes a prima facie case in support. (Williams, supra, 20 Cal.4th 130.) Accordingly, when the prosecution seeks to introduce evidence seized during a warrantless search, they also bear the burden in showing that an exception to the warrant applies. (Mincey v. Arizona (1978) 98 S.Ct. 2408; see also People v. James (1977) 19 Cal.3d 99.) Evidence obtained as a result of an unlawful search and seizure is considered “fruit of the poisonous tree” and should be suppressed. (Wong Sun v. United States (1963) 371 U.S. 471; see also Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993) 508 U.S. 372 (stating unreasonable searches are invalid under Terry and should be suppressed).)

Now a day’s evidence can change a person’s life in the blink of an eye. “People were often punished for crimes based on the word of one or two individuals, with little concern given to sorting out the truth of the affair” (Hunter 12). But today a person must be tried and some physical evidence is needed in order for a person to be convicted of a crime.

Forensic evidence plays a huge role in most criminal cases. After the Daubert trial, forensic scientific evidence was reevaluated in criminal and civil cases. Scientific and forensic types of evidence can be extremely helpful in proving the case. It can help identify the suspect in a criminal case. That will help put a criminal in prison. There are many different types of forensic evidence that can be considered as scientific evidence. The different types include DNA matching, fingerprint identification, and hair evidence. The methods used to show these types of evidence are usually beyond the scope of knowledge that judges and juries know. Those types of forensic evidence are usually introduced as scientific evidence. Scientific evidence can sometimes be omitted from a courtroom or

The acquisition of evidence for a trial is an important step both parties take. However, some methods used to obtain such evidence can be debatable. In order to protect both sides from exploitation, a set of rules are set in place. This rule is called the Exclusionary Rule.

1. In a criminal trial, the defendant must be proven guilty by a preponderance of the evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt?

Warrant - Reasoning that connects the evidence to claim. Helps show the relevance of the evidence.

The Exclusionary rule requires that any evidence taken into custody be obtained by police using methods that violates an individual constitutional rights must be excluded from use in a criminal prosecution against that individual. This rule is judicially imposed and arose relatively recently in the development of the U.S. legal system. Under the common law, the seizure of evidence by illegal means did not affect its admission in court. Any evidence, however obtained, was admitted as long as it satisfied other evidentiary criteria for admissibility, such as relevance and trustworthiness. The exclusionary rule was developed in 1914 and applied to the case of Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383, and was limited to a prohibition on the use

Circumstantial evidence is probably one of the biggest ethical concerns when people are being convicted of crimes. Circumstantial evidence is: “Evidence not bearing directly on the fact in dispute but on various attendant circumstances from which the judge or jury might infer the occurrence of the fact in dispute”. (Dictionay.com, 2010). Many

Her attorney argued that she should never have been brought to trial because the material evidence resulted from an illegal, warrant less search. Because the search was unlawful, he maintained that the evidence was illegally obtained and must also be excluded. In its ruling, the Supreme Court of Ohio recognized that ?a reasonable argument? could be made that the conviction should be reversed ?because the ?methods? employed to obtain the evidence?were such as to offend a sense of justice.? But the court also stated that the materials were admissible evidence. The Court explained its ruling by differentiating between evidence that was peacefully seized from an inanimate object, such as a trunk, rather than forcibly seized from an individual. Based on this decision, Mapp's appeal was denied and her conviction was upheld.

During a trial the plaintiff will attempt to prove their case by the presentation of evidence to the trier of fact. The evidence usually includes testimony of persons involved; witnesses as well as physical things such as pictures, documentation/records, recordings etc…

Evidence gathered from the scene of an alleged crime is critical to constructing a case against a defendant. However, the Constitution provides that it is absolutely essential for the proper procedures to be abided when gathering said evidence. While the availability of certain evidence items procured at the scene of an alleged crime may appear to reinforce the certainty of a defendant's guilt, the process by which this evidence is gotten will have a determinant impact on the ability of prosecution to prove this guilt. As the analysis hereafter will demonstrate, the 'exclusionary rule' is one of the cornerstone clauses to protecting citizens against undue invasion of privacy and freedom while simultaneously creating important standards of practice for law enforcement personnel. The case of Corley v. United States [No. 07-10441), heard before the United States Supreme Court in 2009 and opined upon by Justice David Souter, includes a prominent weighing of the exclusionary rule. The case of Corley v. U.S. demonstrates the determinant impact which the exclusionary rule can have on the findings and outcome of a case.

Forensic science is where hard evidence comes from. In paragraph three of the article it says, “Forensic science is a science applied to answering legal questions.” This is where hard evidence comes into play. Hard evidence is where you find condemning evidence against the defendant. In paragraph six of the article it states, “refers to any tangible article or object of any kind, such as fingerprints, weapons, and bloodstains.” This is most of the time where the defendant gets scared.

The two forms are preponderance of the evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Preponderance is mostly used in civil court, whereas proof beyond a reasonable doubt is used in criminal court. In civil court, the plaintiff must provide factual evidence regarding why he or she is suing the defendant. In a criminal case, a higher standard of evidence is required, which is the proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In most criminal cases the prosecutor must attempt to persuade that the defendant, is, in fact, guilty of the charges brought against them. In criminal cases, the evidence must be circumstantial and adequate enough to decide whether the person is guilty. Which is where the term proof beyond a reasonable doubt derives from. It's another way of saying are you certain, is the proof enough for you to say okay, I have no doubt in my mind that this person is

The Federal Rules of Evidence are meant to insure fairness in Judicial Administration, to avoid unfounded expenses and postponement, and to bolster the advancement and progression of the law of evidence so that truth will be insured and proceedings resolved fittingly. These rules are not intended to culminate an intensive all