If it is proven to be voluntary | |any sexual offense or physical abuse | | |the judge will permit as evidence and all the | |performed with, on or witnessed by the| | |jury to hear rules and evidence regarding | |minor, which is not otherwise | | |confessions as evidence and admissible | |admissible by statute or court rule, | | |statements. | |is admissible in evidence in any | | | | |criminal or civil proceeding if both | | | | |of the following are true:
The | | | | |court finds, in an in camera hearing, | | | | |that the time, content and | | | | |circumstances of the statement provide| | | | |sufficient indicia of reliability. 2. | | | | |Either of the following is true: (a) | | | | |The minor testifies at the | | | | |proceedings. b) The minor is | | | | |unavailable as a witness, provided | | | | |that if the minor is unavailable as a | | | | |witness, the statement may be admitted| | | | |only if there is corroborative | | | | |evidence of the statement. B.
A | | | | |statement shall not be admitted under | | | | |this section unless the proponent of | | | | |the statement makes known to the | | | | |adverse party his intention to offer | | | | |the statement and the particulars of | | | | |the statement sufficiently in advance | | | | |of the proceedings to provide the | | | | |adverse party with a fair opportunity | | | | |to prepare to meet the statement. |Illinois |During an interrogation or interview, if a |Sec 115-10 1 |
On November 24, 2008, the Illinois | | |confession is made from a defendant or if |Admissibility of prior Inconsistent |Supreme Court created the Special | | |there is any other form of evidence that is |Statements |Supreme Court Committee on Illinois | | |brought out during, the evidence can only be |Illinois contends that one must “prove|Evidence (Committee) and charged it | | |admissible in court if the court is |the content of a writing, recording, |with codifying the law of evidence in | | |considering burden of post-trial or pre-trial |or photograph, the original writing, |the state of Illinois. | | |circumstances for bail, or deliberating a |recording, or photograph is required, | | | |prior release order. |except as otherwise provided in these | | | | |rules or by statute” in order to be | | | | |admitted.
The Essay on Court Report 2
The basic division in the structure of criminal courts is between the lower criminal courts – the local courts, Children’s court and Coroner’s court – and the higher criminal courts – the District Court and the Supreme Court. In observing proceedings at the Local, District and Supreme Courts over a period of three days a number of aspects of the criminal justice system were made apparent. The ...
If the original is | | | | |unavailable, exceptions might be made | | | | |(2011).
| | |New York |60. 45 Rules of evidence; admissibility of |New York Police arrested an individual|In New York the high courts restricted| | |statements of defendants. Evidence of a |in his home without a warrant. |admissible statements of any one | | |written or oral confession, admission, or |Citation- 495 U. S. 14 1990 New |accusing an individual of a crime.
In | | |other statement made by a defendant with | |this case, a man was accused for | | |respect to his participation or lack of |Facts- New York Police officers |abusing his 4-year-old daughter, | | |participation in the offense charged, may not |responded to call of a possible victim|according to six witnesses who | | |be received in evidence against him in a |being murdered. Upon arrival officers |testified against the father based on | | |criminal proceeding if such statement was |discovered a dead body in an |the conservations the witnesses had | | |involuntarily made. |apartment. Police officers assume |with the little girl.
The father and | | | |Bernard Harris (respondent) killed the|his former wife were an a child | | | |victim. Three police officers went to |custody dispute which led to the | | | |knock on his door and arrest Bernard |little girl wanting to live with the | | | |Harris without an arrest warrant. |mother and not the father which | | | |Bernard made two statements one at his|resulted to false incrimination done | | | |house and at the police station. |by the father. | | | | | | | |Issue- The second statement made by | | | | |Bernard Harris should have been | | | | |suppressed because the police entered | | | | |his home without a warrant signed from| | | | |the judge. They definitely violated | | | |his fourth amendment prohibits police | | | | |from effecting a warrantless and | | | | |nonconsensual entry into a suspect | | | | |house in order to make a routine | | | | |felony arrest. | |
The Essay on Washburn V State Evidence Tyrone Time
The evidence presented to myself and the other juror's proves that Tyrone Washburn is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the murder of his wife, Elena Washburn. On March 12, 1979 Elena Washburn was strangled in the living room of her family's home. Her body was then dragged to the garage, leaving a trail of blood from the living room to the place it was found. Her husband, Tyrone Washburn, found ...
California |Section 1235 of the California Evidence Code –|Section 770- In People v. Johnson , 68|On the subject of what is admissible | | |Evidence of a statement made by a witness is |Cal (1968)- |the judge always has the final | | |not made inadmissible by the hearsay rule if |In the case of the people v. Johnson |decision. | | |the statement is inconsistent with his/hers |the Supreme Court of California held | | | |testimony at the hearing and is offered in |prior statements of a witness that | | | |compliance. were not subject to cross-examination | | | | |when originally made, could not be | | | | |introduced under this section to prove| | | | |the charges against the defendants | | | | |without the violating the defendants | | | | |right of confrontation guaranteed by | | | | |the sixth amendment. | | In one to three paragraphs, answer the following questions regarding the regulatory information you found while conducting your research. 1. When reviewing the legal requirements to acquire an admissible statement, what similarities did you find among the four states?
There were several similarities among the four states requiring legal requirements to acquire admissible statements. According from the research it is possible California is a more detailed when acquiring admissible statements. But the other state do give a good element on what they are looking for when it comes to court. 2. What differences did you find among the four states? According to the four states, the legal requirements are pretty much in depth. The only thing that makes each state different is the codes used to defined admissible statements. 3. What is the most interesting concept regarding your comparison of admissible statements for these states?
