Indiana Evidence Courtroom Manual has been designed specifically for trial use. Its purpose is to provide fast, concise, and authoritative information for most of the evidentiary questions which arise in the course of trials and hearings, as well as in trial preparation. It accomplishes this through a unique combination of trial-tested features, including:Rules: all the rules are collected at the beginning of the publication, and individual rules start the chapters in which the rule is discussed.Committee Commentary: The Committee Commentary is contained in an appendix at the end of the manual. In adopting the Rules of Evidence, the Supreme Court stated: "The Court has elected to adopt only the text of the Indian Rules of Evidence. Practitioners may find the published committee proposal and its commentary helpful as history but should exercise care in its use, inasmuch as the Court has made changes from the committee proposal based on comments received from members of the bench and bar."Analysis: Perhaps the most important part of this book, the author's Analysis provides a quick overview of the rule under discussion, authoritative guidance in interpreting the rule, and pointers for applying the rule in actual practice. In many chapters the Analysis contains special features such as Illustrations, Constitutional Considerations, and Current Trends and New Developments.Incorporated Statutes: Some rules require reference to sections of the Indiana Code. When this is the case, the incorporated statutes appear in the appropriate chapter.Authority: Additional authorities are cited following each chapter's Analysis. These give the user a starting point for additional research.Comparison to Federal Rule: A brief comparison of the Indiana and Federal Rules in each chapter provides additional insight.Cases: Significant cases are summarized at the end of each chapter. These provide support for argument and decisions required during the course of proceedings.
R v Campbell (2007) FACTS: The defendant was charged with false imprisonment and assault against a woman with whom he had a sexual relationship. The prosecution was permitted to adduce evidence of recent crimes of violence against ...
An illustration of the application of section 74(1) may be found in R v Robertson. Robertson was charged with conspiring with Poole and Long to commit burglaries. Poole and Long pleaded guilty to relevant substantive counts of burglary, ...
He argued that Officer Moore was mistaking him for a man named David Bailey, with whom he was playing dice around the time of the sale. Mr. Copelin and his corroborating witnesses testified that they had seen Mr. Bailey repeatedly leave ...
Hallmark features of An Analytical Approach to Evidence: Text, Problems, and Cases: An opening transcript from an actual criminal law case illustrates how evidence is admitted and excluded in practice--Chapter Two on the trial process can ...
In Powell v. State,266 the accused was charged with indecency with a child. The prosecution introduced testimony from six witnesses to the effect that they too had been victims of the accused's acts, on the argument that the evidence of ...
Lowery , 6.9 n.255 Turner v . Safley , 5.3 n.267 ; 6.2 n.262 6.12 nn.26 , 169 , 195 , 263 , 430 Tornay v . United States , 6.7 nn.77,96 Torres v . INS , 5.4 n.51 Torres v . Kuzniasz , 6.12 nn.272 , 276 Torres v .
As the prosecution points out , Sullivan's direct testimony raised the issue of his credibility to the jury . Sullivan's credibility was in fact the central issue litigated in the case , as the defense presented only Sullivan and the ...
Maryland Evidence Handbook
Maryland Evidence Handbook
Evidence of Opinion and Expert Evidence