A UNC School of Government Blog
Evidence Rule 801(d) sets out a hearsay exception for “Admissions by a Party-Opponent.” If you’re not clear on that rule, read on. The rule says that a statement is admissible under this exception if it is “offered against a party” and is (A) his or her own statement, in an individual or representative capacity; (B) … Read more
The first two posts in this series (here and here) discussed opinions from state supreme courts in Arizona and Minnesota considering, post-McNeely v. Missouri, 133 S.Ct. 1552 (2013), whether a suspect’s submission to implied consent testing was voluntary consent within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. This post discusses why that sort of analysis is … Read more
Yesterday’s post discussed challenges to implied consent laws raised by defendants following the Supreme Court’s decision last spring in Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S.Ct. 1552 (2013). The post summarized the Arizona Supreme Court’s holding that, independent of the state’s implied consent law, the Fourth Amendment requires an arrestee’s consent to be voluntary to justify a … Read more
The United States Supreme Court held last term in Missouri v. McNeeIy, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (2013), that the natural dissipation of alcohol in a person’s bloodstream does not constitute an exigency in every impaired driving case sufficient to excuse the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement. McNeely’s holding comported with the analysis that the North Carolina … Read more
I field a lot of calls from prosecutors, defenders, and judges about evidence issues. Character evidence is one area that accounts for a lot of those calls. And no wonder. The rules are complicated and almost impossible to keep straight. The basic rule is that character evidence can’t be admitted to show propensity. Thus, evidence … Read more
That’s what I said to my husband during the breakfast hour this morning, while I was working as a short-order cook and waitress for three rather demanding customers (our children). To his credit, he complied and asked how he could help. As a result, I not only got relief, but I got to pick the … Read more
More and more criminal cases involve electronic tracking. Sometimes the defendant is tracked using GPS, other times using cell site location information. Either way, interesting evidentiary questions arise. May an officer who knows how to use a tracking device testify about tracking, even if she doesn’t know much about how the underlying technology works? Who … Read more
I previously posted (here) about impeaching a witness with a prior inconsistent statement. In this blog post I’ll address impeaching with evidence of bias. As our blog readers know, a witness may be impeached with evidence that he or she is biased because of, for example, affection for or dislike of a party or self-interest … Read more
DWI law scholars, answer the following question. Are the results of all breath tests that were administered to the defendant admissible in an implied consent case? Yes, if the results from any two consecutively collected breath samples do not differ from each other by more than 0.02. No, only the two consecutively collected breath samples … Read more
Tucked into the 2013 North Carolina budget bill is a provision imposing new court costs for expert witnesses who testify about chemical or forensic analyses at trial. Specifically, the new law (sec. 18B.19 of the budget bill) provides that upon conviction the trial judge must require a convicted defendant to pay $600 in costs if … Read more