We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
AMBIGUITY IN THE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE: WHY NORTH DAKOTA SHOULD FOLLOW THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY'S GUIDANCE REGARDING THE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE IN STATE COURT MATTERS.
- Authors
Solemsaas, Emerson
- Abstract
The Federal Rules of Evidence (the "Rules" or the "FRE") are designed to ensure fairness to litigants and to achieve uniformity in application. Despite this, ambiguity in the text of the Rules can lead to varying applications among the federal judiciary on a discretionary basis. The Judicial Conference is tasked with amending the existing Rules or proposing new rules to remedy any inconsistencies in interpretation or application. The procedural process to amend the FRE is designated to the Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules. In May 2022, the Committee proposed amendments to Rules 611, 613(b), 801(d)(2), 804(b)(3), and 1006. The initial amendment to Rule 611, Rule 611(d), would later become the newly proposed Rule 107 and aims to provide guidance on the use of illustrative aids in the courtroom. The proposed amendments to Rules 801(d)(2) and 804(b)(3) clearly reflect the Committee' s attempt to resolve the remaining uncertainty in the hearsay doctrine. The Committee's proposal of Rule 107 demonstrates the Committee's attempt to provide guidance in an area of emerging researchthe use of illustrative aids in the courtroom. In October 2023, the Judicial Conference advanced a memorandum to the United States Supreme Court recommending adopting the proposed changes. If adopted, the amendments are projected to go into effect in December 2024. North Dakota practitioners should be cognizant of these changes that would impact any practitioners that practice in federal district court. Additionally, this Note will argue that North Dakota follow the federal judiciary's guidance and adopt the proposed amendments or similar changes reflecting the same language to the North Dakota Rules of Evidence for the same reasons the Committee proposed the amendments to the FRE: to resolve ambiguity and to achieve uniformity in application.
- Subjects
NORTH Dakota; FEDERAL Rules of Evidence (U.S.); LEGAL self-representation; COURTS; UNITED States. Supreme Court; JUDICIAL Conference of the United States
- Publication
North Dakota Law Review, 2024, Vol 99, Issue 2, p483
- ISSN
0029-2745
- Publication type
Article