Ad
related to: why aren't polygraphs admissible court cases in california
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303 (1998), was the first case in which the Supreme Court issued a ruling with regard to the highly controversial matter of polygraph, or "lie-detector," testing. At issue was whether the per se exclusion of polygraph evidence offered by the accused in a military court violates the Sixth Amendment right to present a defense.
The court compared forensic hypnosis to the polygraph test stating that they could both be used in criminal investigation but were not admissible in court. [ 4 ] An additional issue with the admission of forensic hypnosis is that when admitted it would have the status of a witness testimony which the jury would be asked to evaluate.
American inventor Leonarde Keeler testing his improved polygraph on Arthur Koehler, a former witness for the prosecution at the 1935 trial of Richard Hauptmann. A polygraph, often incorrectly referred to as a lie detector test, [1] [2] [3] is a pseudoscientific [4] [5] [6] device or procedure that measures and records several physiological indicators such as blood pressure, pulse, respiration ...
Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that added behavior that "shocks the conscience" into tests of what violates due process clause of the 14th Amendment. [1] This balancing test is often criticized as having subsequently been used in a particularly subjective manner. [2] [3]
Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966), was a landmark [1] United States Supreme Court case in which the Court clarified the application of the Fourth Amendment's protection against warrantless searches and the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination for searches that intrude into the human body.
On appeal the majority from the Court of Appeal granted an order to reopen the trial to allow the trial judge to examine the polygraph evidence. The issue was presented to the Supreme Court of Canada as to whether "evidence of the results of a polygraph examination is admissible in light of the particular facts of this case". In a five to two ...
California, 549 U.S. 270 (2007), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that the sentencing standard set forward in Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) applies to California 's determinate sentencing law.
Samson v. California, 547 U.S. 843 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court affirmed the California Court of Appeal's ruling that suspicionless searches of parolees are lawful under California law and that the search in this case was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution because it was not arbitrary, capricious, or harassing.