AF

The Evolution of the Law of Criminal Evidence

EVOLUTION OF LAW

  • Definition of Law: A codification of social norms and expectations deemed necessary for societal maintenance, designed to ensure order, resolve disputes, and promote justice.

  • Substantive Law: Defines social behavior parameters, outlining rights and duties. Examples include criminal offenses (e.g., murder, theft) and civil rights (e.g., property ownership, contract enforcement).

  • Procedural Law: Governs adjudication processes for behaviors prohibited by substantive law, detailing the steps for legal proceedings from arrest to trial and appeal.

  • Mala in Se: Crimes inherently wrong regardless of law, rooted in natural moral intuition (e.g., patricide, murder, serious assault).

  • Evidence: Demonstration of truth/untruth of allegations through relevant, competent, material, and probative information.

    • Relevancy: Evidence that tends to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

    • Competency: Evidence that is legally admissible, meaning it meets certain standards (e.g., proper foundational testimony, not privileged).

    • Materiality: Evidence that is significant or essential to the case at hand, relating to a key issue in dispute. (Often merged with relevancy in modern rules).

    • Probative Value: The extent to which evidence tends to prove or disprove a fact in issue.

MALA IN SE VS. MALA PROHIBITA

  • Mala in Se: Behaviors inherently immoral, universally condemned regardless of written law, reflecting a societal consensus on natural law (e.g., child rape, murder, robbery). These acts are considered wrong in themselves.

  • Mala Prohibita: Behaviors not inherently immoral, but wrong due to legal prohibition, often designed to regulate public order or welfare (e.g., gambling, speeding, drug possession, certain zoning violations). Their wrongfulness is by legislative decree.

THE HISTORY OF LAW AND LEGAL PROCESS

  • Pre-Christian Era Legal Systems: Religious-based systems intertwined with moral codes in early civilizations like Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Hebrew, and Hindu.

    • Egyptian Law: Early forms consisted of 40 scrolls, emphasizing order and justice through divine decree. It placed a significant burden of proof on the accused, often relying on oracles or divine judgment. Pharaohs acted as chief judges.

    • Hebrew Law: Evolved through periods, starting with oral traditions and culminating in codified laws (e.g., Mosaic Law in the Torah). It was characterized by a communal focus, punitive measures, and, at times, nepotism within the priestly judicial system; self-representation was common without formal advocates.

    • Mesopotamian Law: Best exemplified by the Code of Hammurabi (circa 1754 BC), which was a comprehensive written collection of 282 civil and criminal laws. It detailed specific laws for various offenses, set economic regulations, and prescribed punishments based on the "lex talionis" (an eye for an eye) principle, varying by social status.

    • Hindu Law: Primarily derived from sacred texts and customs (e.g., Dharma-shastras). It featured a rigid, caste-based system defining laws and punishments according to societal rank and religious duty, with Brahmins holding significant judicial authority.

EMERGENCE OF SECULAR SYSTEMS

  • Greek Law: Early forms introduced the concept of the jury system, particularly in Athens, where large citizen juries (dikasteries) of up to 500 or more were involved in legal matters. This marked a shift towards public participation in justice. Socratic caution emphasized the dangers of wrongful conviction and the importance of due process, as exemplified by Socrates' own trial.

  • Roman Law: Pioneered the development of professional judges (praetors) and jurisconsults, leading to a more sophisticated legal science. The Twelve Tables (circa 450 BC) were an early codification of Roman public and private law, laying the groundwork for a comprehensive legal system. It introduced concepts like ius civile (citizen law) and ius gentium (law of nations), influencing Western legal thought significantly and establishing a clear separation of politics from law in procedure.

  • Common Law: Evolved in England from the 11th century onward, based on customs, traditions, and particularly judicial precedents established by royal courts. It reflected societal norms and developed ad hoc through case decisions, forming a body of law distinct from legislative enactments. This system emphasized continuity and consistency through the application of prior rulings.

COMMON LAW VS. CIVIL LAW

  • Common Law: A legal system predominantly found in England, its former colonies (including the U.S. and Commonwealth nations), and others. It is characterized by judge-made law based on customs and judicial precedents (case law), where decisions in higher courts bind lower courts.

  • Civil Law: Originating from Roman law, this system is prevalent in continental Europe, Latin America, and many other parts of the world. It is based on comprehensive, codified legislative statutes; judicial decisions are not binding precedent but serve primarily to interpret the codes. The Napoleonic Code (early 19th century) is a prime example of its influence, emphasizing detailed written laws rather than judicial interpretation precedent.

PRECEDENT AND STARE DECISIS

  • Precedent: A judicially established rule or principle derived from previous court decisions that must be followed by future courts in cases with similar facts or issues. It is fundamental for ensuring predictability, fairness, and consistency in the law.

  • Stare Decisis: A Latin legal principle meaning "to stand by that which is decided." It requires courts within the same jurisdiction (and typically lower courts relative to higher courts) to adhere to previous rulings (precedents) on similar issues. This doctrine promotes judicial efficiency, stability, and public confidence in the legal system. There are two main types:

    • Vertical Stare Decisis: Lower courts are bound by the decisions of higher courts in their jurisdiction.

    • Horizontal Stare Decisis: A court typically adheres to its own prior decisions, though it may sometimes overrule them in compelling circumstances.

THE ROLE OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS

The Bill of Rights (first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution) plays a critical role in establishing individual liberties and limits on governmental power, particularly impacting criminal evidence and procedure.

  • Fifth Amendment: Guarantees several fundamental rights relevant to criminal proceedings:

    • Grand Jury Indictment: Requires a grand jury for federal felony charges, determining if probable cause exists.

    • Protection Against Double Jeopardy: Prevents an individual from being prosecuted or punished more than once for the same offense by the same sovereign.

    • Privilege Against Self-Incrimination: Known as "taking the Fifth," protects individuals from being compelled to be a witness against themselves in a criminal case. This underlies the Miranda warnings.

    • Due Process Clause: Requires fair treatment through the judicial system, ensuring that life, liberty, or property cannot be taken without due process of law. This concept embraces both procedural (fair procedures) and substantive (fundamental rights) due process.

    • Just Compensation (Eminent Domain): Prohibits the government from taking private property for public use without just compensation.

  • Sixth Amendment: Ensures the right to a fair trial in criminal cases:

    • Speedy and Public Trial: Guarantees that criminal proceedings are not unduly delayed and are open to the public.

    • Impartial Jury: Right to be tried by an unbiased jury of peers in the district where the crime was committed.

    • Right to Be Informed of Charges: Accused must be notified of the nature and cause of the accusation.

    • Confrontation Clause: Guarantees the right to confront (cross-examine) witnesses testifying against the accused, crucial for testing the reliability of testimony (e.g., Crawford v. Washington).

    • Compulsory Process for Obtaining Witnesses: Right to subpoena witnesses to testify on one's behalf.

    • Assistance of Counsel: Right to legal representation, even if indigent (as established by Gideon v. Wainwright).

  • Seventh Amendment: Preserves the right to a jury trial in civil cases exceeding twenty dollars. While less directly impactful on criminal evidence, it reinforces the importance of jury trials in the American legal system.

  • Eighth Amendment: Prohibits excessive bail and fines, and cruel and unusual punishment. This amendment influences sentencing guidelines and challenges to inhumane forms of punishment.

  • Ninth Amendment: Recognizes that the enumeration of specific rights in the Constitution does not mean that other unenumerated rights retained by the people are denied or disparaged. This implies that individuals possess fundamental rights beyond those explicitly listed (e.g., right to privacy).

  • Tenth Amendment: Affirms the principle of federalism, stating that powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. This underscores the states' authority in areas like criminal law and procedure, often referred to as their "police powers."

IMPLIED CONCEPTS IN EVIDENCE LAW
BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT

  • Key Principle: The presumption of innocence is a cornerstone of American criminal justice, holding that the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty by the prosecution. This presumption places the entire burden of proof on the state.

  • Reasonable Doubt Standard: The highest legal standard of proof required in criminal trials. It mandates that the prosecution must prove every element of the crime charged to the extent that no reasonable doubt remains in the minds of the jurors regarding the defendant's guilt. This is not proof beyond "all possible doubt" but rather a high degree of certainty such that a reasonable person would not hesitate to act upon it in their most important affairs.

RULES OF EVIDENCE

  • Definition: A comprehensive body of rules and legal principles that govern the admissibility of evidence and testimony in court proceedings. These rules are designed to ensure fair trials, protect fundamental rights, promote accurate fact-finding, and limit the admission of unreliable, prejudicial, or irrelevant information.

  • Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE): A codification adopted in 1975, designed to ensure uniformity across federal courts in how evidence is presented and admitted. They cover various aspects包括 standard of proof, rules against hearsay, requirements for witness testimony (competency, impeachment), authentication of documents, handling of expert testimony, and more. The FRE are periodically reviewed and amended by Congress and the Supreme Court.

SOURCES OF LAW IN THE AMERICAN SYSTEM

  • Common Law vs. Civil Law: The U.S. legal system is largely based on the English common law tradition, emphasizing judicial precedent. However, it also incorporates elements of civil law through detailed federal and state statutes. This hybrid approach allows for robust judicial interpretation while also providing clear legislative guidelines. Independent state powers allow states to develop their own common law traditions and statutory frameworks, leading to variations across jurisdictions.

  • Uniform Rules of Evidence (URE): Developed by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) to standardize evidence law across states. While not universally adopted, many states have incorporated aspects of the URE or modeled their own rules after the Federal Rules of Evidence. The aim is to reduce arbitrary legal discrepancies and provide a consistent framework for evidence admissibility, promoting clarity and efficiency in interstate legal matters.

CONCLUSIONS

  • The evolution of law, from ancient religious systems to modern secular codes, profoundly reflects the social, political, and cultural fabric of its time. Evidence law, as an integral component, remains crucial to upholding justice, ensuring fair processes, and protecting individual rights within the justice system.

  • Contemporary legislation and judicial interpretation by appellate courts, especially the U.S. Supreme Court, continue to dynamically shape evidence law. Landmark decisions frequently redefine admissibility standards and procedural safeguards, underscoring its ever-evolving nature.

  • The necessity for continuous adaptation of laws to fit modern societal expectations, technological advancements (e.g., digital evidence, forensic science), and evolving understandings of justice is paramount. This ensures that legal frameworks, particularly those governing evidence, remain relevant and effective in an increasingly complex world.

KEY TERMS

  • Arraignment

  • Bill of Rights

  • Hearsay

  • Procedure law

  • Burden of proof

  • Relevancy

  • Presumption of innocence

  • Evidence