NCJ Number
123255
Journal
Saint Louis University Law Journal Volume: 33 Issue: 1 Dated: (Fall 1988) Pages: 1-18
Date Published
1989
Length
18 pages
Annotation
Although the use of social science data in factfinding for court decisionmaking has increased over time, there are no systematic patterns or guidelines for such use.
Abstract
Criteria have yet to be formulated for various aspects of the judiciary's use of the social sciences, notably in the admission of social science data at trial; the use of such data at the appellate level, whether or not introduced at trial; measuring the accuracy of claims of inferences made on the basis of the data; and determining the weight to be accorded social science findings. Unless and until systematic criteria are formulated for the application of social science data to judicial decisionmaking, the subject will remain hazy regardless of its potential. One case that illustrates the U.S. Supreme Court's confused response to social science data is United States v. Leon (1984), in which the Court considered the works of Davies and Nardulli, who researched the impact of the use of the exclusionary rule upon the administration of justice. The Court majority selectively used and misconstrued the data in reaching its decision. This was also the case in the U.S. Supreme Court's use of the Baldus study in McCleskey v. Kemp. The court failed to interpret properly the legal significance of Baldus' findings regarding the racially disproportionate impact of the Georgia capital-sentencing process. 87 footnotes.