Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. GRAY Juvenile Court of Ohio, Cuyahoga County. 145 N.E.2d 162 (1957) Case Brief.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. In re Richard A. ALCORN and Steven Feola Supreme Court of Arizona, 202 Ariz. 62, 41 P.3d 600.
Advertisements

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. JIMENEZ RECIO 537 U.S. 270 (2003) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. Willard JOHNSON U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 327 F.3d 554 (2003) Case Brief.
Chapter 4: Enforcing the Law 4 How Can Disputes Be Resolved Privately?
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. BUTLER 19 Ohio St.2d 55, 249 N.E.2d 818 (1969) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. DECK v. MISSOURI 125 S.Ct (2005) Case Brief.
Goal 5.03 Describe the adversarial nature of the judicial process.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. PEOPLE v. DLUGASH 41 N.Y.2d 725, 363 N.E.2d 1155 (N.Y. 1977) Case Brief.
+ The Criminal Trial Process. + The Charter Section 11(d) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that a person charged with an offence is to be.
Courts and Court Systems Chapter 2. Copyright © 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning Objectives Explain the difference between trial and appellate courts. Explain.
R OLES & R ESPONSIBILITIES From Speaking With A Purpose: Jo Thornton & Jessica Pegis.
The Anatomy of a Criminal Case Government – Libertyville HS.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. PONDER v. GRAHAM 4 Fla. 23 (1851) Case Brief.
Alaska Mock Trial Glossary of Terms. Laws Rules created by society to govern the behavior of people in society. Among other things, the laws are one formal.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BLANTON v. CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 489 U.S. 538 (1989) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. COLBY v. CARNEY HOSPITAL 356 Mass. 527, 254 N.E.2d 407 (1969) Case Brief.
CHAPTER 3 Judicial Process. Goals  Understand jurisdictional differences  Understand the structure of the federal court system  Understand the structure.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GRIFFIN v. CALIFORNIA 380 U.S. 609 (1965) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BROWN v. SOUTHLAND 620 F.Supp (E.D.Mo. 1985) Case Brief.
Copyright © 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Chapter 6 Delinquency Hearings.
CIVIL PROCEDURE FALL 2005 SECTIONS C & F CLASS 24 DISCOVERY V.
Courts and the Case Process. I. The Two Systems of Criminal Courts A. Federal and state courts (more trials take place in state courts) B. Federal Courts.
State Court System By: Ashanti, Glenn, Timmy, Julie.
Trial Process Unit 2. Preliminary Hearing Only for indictable offences only! Similar to a trial, but usually much shorter. Witness and evidence will be.
Courtroom Terms Twelve Angry Men. 10/18/2015 copyright ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 2 Amendments 5 th Amendment: Guarantees due process—each.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. Pamela L. PETERS Supreme Court of Wisconsin, 263 Wis.2d 475, 665 N.W.2d 171 (2003)
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. CARRUTHERS v. STATE Supreme Court of Georgia, 528 S.E.2d 217 (2000) Case Brief.
Chapter 4 Resolving Disputes: Litigation and Alternative Dispute Resolution Options Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE FARM v. CAMPBELL 538 U.S. 408 (2003) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. LYNCH v. LYNCH 164 Ariz. 127 (1990) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. LOWE v. QUINN 27 N.Y.2d 397, 267 N.E.2d (N.Y. 1971) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. PEOPLE v. MITCHELL 58 N.Y.2d 368, 448 N.E.2d 121 (1983) Case Brief.
Summary Judgment and Summary Adjudication LA 310.
Brown: Legal Terminology, 5 th ed. © 2008 Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ All Rights Reserved. Legal Terminology Fifth Edition by Gordon.
Test Yourself: Introduction to Law. State for each of the following terms whether they are to be found in criminal law or civil law or both.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. UNITED STATES v. JEWELL 532 F.2d 697 (2d Cir. 1976) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. MINNEAPOLIS STAR & TRIBUNE v. LEE 353 N.W.2d 213 (Minn.Ct.App. 1984) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. NEWMAN v. SUMMY CO. 133 F.2d 465 (2d Cir. 1943) Case Brief.
Copyright © 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Chapter 10 Abuse-Neglect-Dependency Hearings.
Court Systems and Practices. 2 Copyright and Terms of Service Copyright © Texas Education Agency, These materials are copyrighted © and trademarked.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. WILLIAMS Supreme Court of Iowa 695 N.W.2d 23 (2005) Case Brief.
Mock Trials Court Systems and Practices. Copyright © Texas Education Agency All rights reserved. Images and other multimedia content used with permission.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STUMP v. SPARKMAN 435 U.S. 349 (1978) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. OREGON STATE BAR v. SMITH 149 Or.App. 171, 942 P.2d 793 (1997) Case Brief.
COURTS, JUDGES AND THE LAW Key Terms on Judicial Branch.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. FINE v. DELALANDE, INC. 545 F.Supp. 275 (S.D.N.Y. 1982) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. RIEMERS v. GRAND FORKS HERALD 688 N.W.2d 167 (N.D. 2004) Case Brief.
Virginia RULES Teens Learn & Live the Law Legal Rights of Juveniles.
THE JUDICIAL BRANCH COURTS, JUDGES, AND THE LAW. MAIN ROLE Conflict Resolution! With every law, comes potential conflict Role of judicial system is to.
Virginia RULES Teens Learn & Live the Law Introduction to a Virginia Courtroom.
Start Figure 7.10 Trial by Jury, p. 183 End.
The Criminal Trial Process
STATE v. WINDER 348 N.Y.S.2d 270 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1973)
Civil Pre-Trial Procedures
Civil Pre-Trial Procedures
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
MARTIN v. MARCIANO 871 A.2d 911 (R.I. 2005)
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
Chapter Sixteen Rules of Evidence  .
Bellwork.
Steps of a Crime.
Law of Evidence Burden and standard of proof.
CAMPBELL SOUP CO. v. WENTZ 172 F.2d 80 (3d Cir. 1948)
Start Figure 7.10 Trial by Jury, p. 183 End.
STATE v. KINGMAN 463 P.2d 638 (Wash. 1970)
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
ARENA LAND & INV. CO., INC. v. PETTY 69 F.3d 547 (10th Cir. 1995)
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
PEOPLE v. ALEXANDER 53 Ill.App.2d 299, 202 N.E.2d 841 (1964)
Law 12 Criminal Trial Process.
Presentation transcript:

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. GRAY Juvenile Court of Ohio, Cuyahoga County. 145 N.E.2d 162 (1957) Case Brief

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. GRAY Historical note: In the 1940s, the great silent film actor Charlie Chaplin was sued by Joan Berry over paternity of her daughter, Carol Ann Berry. Chaplin agreed to pay support for the child if blood tests indicated he could be the father. To the contrary, the blood tests indicated he could not have been the father. The court refused to take judicial notice of the blood tests as conclusive and sent the case to the jury, which concluded that Charlie was the father. Although judicial notice is usually reserved for matters of common knowledge, the question arises as to whether the court should take fact-finding away from the jury when scientific certainty compels a factual conclusion.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. GRAY PURPOSE: An example of judicial notice.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. GRAY CAUSE OF ACTION: Bastardy [Note that bastardy proceedings are “quasi-criminal” proceedings that are used to establish paternity for related civil suits. The court uses preponderance of the evidence rather than guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.]

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. GRAY FACTS: Unmarried man and woman had intimate relations. The woman, Steiger, alleges her daughter is child of defendant Gray.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. GRAY ISSUE: Whether the court may take judicial notice of blood tests as proving nonpaternity (and dismiss case).

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. GRAY HOLDING: Yes. A qualified expert witness testified that one of the several blood tests proved that Gray could not be the father and the case is dismissed.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. GRAY REASONING: “....This court further believes that the near unanimity of medical and legal authorities on the question of the reliability of blood grouping tests as an indicator of the truth in questioned paternity cases justifies the taking of judicial notice of the general recognition of the accuracy and value of [such] tests... The law does not hesitate to adopt scientific aids to the discovery of the truth which have achieved such recognition.”

Feedback: Privacy Policy Feedback
Do Not Sell My Personal Information
About project: SlidePlayer Terms of Service

© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc. All rights reserved.