Publications by Professor Jonakait

Professor Randolph Jonakait
Publications

BOOKS

The American Jury System. (Yale University Press, 2003).

New York Evidentiary Foundations. 2nd ed. (Lexis Law Publishing, 1994) (with H. Baer, E.S. Jones & E. Imwinkelried) (Annual Supplements).

The Abuses of the Military Chaplaincy. (ACLU, 1973). 

CHAPTERS IN BOOKS

“Is the Military Chaplaincy Constitutional?” Chapter 5 in Military Chaplains: From Religious Military to a Military Religion, at 129–137 (H.G. Cox, ed.). American Report Press, 1973.

LAW REVIEW AND OTHER SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS

"The Two Hemispheres of Legal Education and the Rise and Fall of Local Law Schools" (New York Law School Faculty Presentation Day III), 51 New York Law School Law Review 863-905 (2006-2007).

"'Witnesses' in the Confrontation Clause: Crawford v. Washington, Noah Webster, and Compulsory Process," 79 Temple Law Review 155-198 (2006).

"The Too Easy Historical Assumptions of Crawford v. Washington," Brooklyn Law Review 219-233 (2005).

"Rasul v. Bush: Unanswered Questions," 13 William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal 1103-1138 (2005).

"A Double Due Process Denial: The Crime of Providing Material Support or Resources to Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations" (Symposium: Criminal Defense in the Age of Terrorism), 48 New York Law School Law Review 125–172 (2003/04).

"People v. Molineux and Other Crime Evidence: One Hundred Years and Counting," 40 American Journal of Criminal Law 1–43 (2003). 

“The Standard of Appellate Review for Scientific Evidence: Beyond Joiner and Scheffer.” 32 U.C. Davis Law Review 289–340 (1999).

“Secret Testimony and Public Trials in New York.” 42 New York Law School Law Review 407–446 (1998).

“‘MY GOD!’ Is This How a Feminist Analyzes Excited Utterances?” Review of article “‘MY GOD!’: A Feminist Critique of the Excited Utterance Exception to the Hearsay Rule,” by Aviva Orenstei. 4 William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law 263–294 (1997).

“The Assessment of Expertise: Transcending Construction.” 37 Santa Clara Law Review 301–347 (1997).

“Text, Texts, or Ad Hoc Determinations: Interpretation of the Federal Rules of Evidence.” 71 Indiana Law Journal 551–591 (1996).

“The Origins of the Confrontation Clause: An Alternative History.” 27 Rutgers Law Journal 77–168 (1995).

“Coconspirator Statements and Former Testimony in New York and Federal Courts with Some Comments on Codification (Symposium: Comparing New York and Federal Evidence Law).” 11 Touro Law Review 37–56 (1994).

“The Meaning of Daubert and What That Means for Forensic Science.” 15 Cardozo Law Review 2103–2117 (1994).

“Insuring Reliable Fact Finding in Guidelines Sentencing: Why Not Real Evidence Rules?” 22 Capital University Law Review 31–44 (1993).

“Real Science and Forensic Science.” 1 Shepard’s Expert & Scientific Evidence Quarterly 435–455 (1993), at 448–455. Reprinted in An Evidence Anthology, at 122–126 (E.J. Imwinkelried & G. Weissenberger, eds., Anderson, 1996).

“Biased Evidence Rules: A Framework for Judicial Analysis and Reform.” 1992 Utah Law Review 67–99.

“Foreword: Notes for a Consistent and Meaningful Sixth Amendment.” 82 Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 713–746 (1992).

“Making the Law of Factual Determinations Matter More.” 25 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 673–688 (1992).

“The Right to Confrontation: Not a Mere Restraint on Government.” 76 Minnesota Law Review 615–621 (1992).

“Forensic Science: The Need for Regulation.” 4 Harvard Journal of Law & Technology 109–191 (1991).

“Stories, Forensic Science, and Improved Verdicts.” 13 Cardozo Law Review 343–352 (1991).

“The Supreme Court, Plain Meaning, and the Changed Rules of Evidence.” 68 Texas Law Review 745–786 (1990), at 782–786. Reprinted in An Evidence Anthology, at 51–53 (E.J. Imwinkelried & G. Weissenberger, eds.). Anderson, 1996.

“Prosecutorial Behavior and Distorted Verdicts.” 24 Criminal Law Bulletin 254–258 (1988).

“Restoring the Confrontation Clause to the Sixth Amendment.” 35 UCLA Law Review 557–622 (1988).

“The Ethical Prosecutor’s Misconduct.” 23 Criminal Law Bulletin 550–567 (1987).

“The Subversion of the Hearsay Rule: The Residual Hearsay Exceptions, Circumstantial Guarantees of Trustworthiness, and Grand Jury Testimony.” 36 Case Western Reserve Law Review 431–481 (1986).

“When Blood is Their Argument: Probabilities in Criminal Cases, Genetic Markers, and, Once Again, Bayes’ Theorem.” 1983 University of Illinois Law Review 369–421.

“Will Blood Tell? Genetic Markers in Criminal Cases.” 31 Emory Law Journal 833–912 (1982).

“Reliable Identification: Could the Supreme Court Tell in Manson v. Brathwaite?” 52 University of Colorado Law Review 511–528 (1981). Reprinted, as abridged, in A Criminal Procedure Anthology, at 391–396 (S.J. Wasserstrom & C.L. Snyder, eds.). Anderson, 1996.

“Two Proposals for Abolishing the Insanity Defense.” Book Reviews of The Insanity Plea: The Uses and Abuses of the Insanity Defense, by William J. Winslade and Judith Wilson Ross; and Madness and the Criminal Law, by Norval Morris. 35 Hastings Law Journal 403–427 (1983).

Book Review of The Best Defense, by Alan M. Dershowitz. 6 Criminal Justice Journal 163–178 (1982).

NEWSPAPER ARTICLES, PRACTICE MATERIALS, AND OTHER PUBLICATIONS

“Judicial Decisions Generally Ease Burdens of Prosecution; Knowledge Element of Drug Possession is Exception.” 212 New York Law Journal S5 (October 3, 1994).

“Do Art Exhibitions Destroy Common Law Copyright in Works of Art?” 19 Copyright Law Symposium 81–116 (1971).