NCJ Number
7489
Journal
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LAW REVIEW Volume: 18 Issue: 1 Dated: (NOVEMBER 1970) Pages: 157-187
Date Published
1970
Length
31 pages
Annotation
DISCUSSION OF THE TRADITIONAL POLICIES IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING PRESUMPTIONS, AND A CRITICISM OF THEIR VIOLATION OF A DEFENDANT'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
Abstract
A STATUTORY PRESUMPTION ALLOWS A JURY TO PRESUME THE EXISTENCE OF ONE FACT IF A PARTICULAR ANTECEDENT FACT IS ESTABLISHED AND THE DEFENDANT CANNOT OTHERWISE SHOW WHY THE PRESUMED FACT DOES NOT FOLLOW. THE AUTHOR ARGUES THAT THIS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY ESTABLISHES A BURDEN ON THE DEFENDANT TO PROVE HIS INNOCENCE. NONETHELESS, JUDICIAL ECONOMY, THE COMPARATIVE CONVENIENCE FOR THE TRIAL IF THE DEFENDANT IS REQUIRED TO SHOW FACTS MOST LIKELY TO BE WITHIN HIS CONTROL, AND THE PROMOTION OF RATIONAL JURY VERDICTS BY TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE LEGISLATURE'S FACT FINDING ABILITY ALL MILITATE IN FAVOR OF PRESUMPTIONS. ONE POSSIBLE SOLUTION IS TO INTRODUCE LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AS TO THE LIKELIHOOD OF THE SECOND FACT FOLLOWING FROM THE FIRST DIRECTLY TO THE JURY AS EVIDENCE. IN SUCH A CASE, THE JURY RETAINS ITS FACT-FINDING ROLE AND THE DEFENDANT IS NOT AS PRESSURED TO TAKE THE STAND IN HIS OWN DEFENSE.